Ok, sounds good.
On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 9:19 AM, Greg Lee <gleetb...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> The test result that fails differs from the "correct" value in fptest.l by
> one least significant bit:
> : (d2s 4607137420321232833 "%18.16f")
> -> "0.9950041652780258"
> : (d2s 4607137420321232832 "%18.16f")
> -> "0.9950041652780257"
> This is actually a lot better than I expected. I expected about half of
> the trigonometric and transcendental functions to fail this way on
> different processors, operating systems, and compilers. We should give a
> tip of the hat to the nameless, faceless software engineers who write these
> underlying trig functions that are so fast and so accurate.
> The "bug" would be in fptest.l. Floating point tests should not be made
> against exact values, but against a value with an specified delta of
> accuracy. Perhaps a future version of picolisp-fp will have better unit
> tests like that.
> Greg Lee
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Pechkin
> Sent: Jan 25, 2016 5:22 AM
> To: email@example.com
> Subject: fp + SunOS
> fp now works on solaris in pil64.
> only one test fails, on linux it pass:
> # pil +
> : (load "@lib/fp.l")
> -> dmodf
> : (load "fptest.l")
> ((dcos 4591870180066957722))
> [fptest.l:201] 4607137420321232833 -- 'test' failed
> ? (dcos 4591870180066957722)
> -> 4607137420321232832
> p.s. i've run separate version too, it fails on the same test
> -- UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org?subjectUnsubscribe