Ok, sounds good. On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 9:19 AM, Greg Lee <gleetb...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Hi. > > 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. > > Thanks, > > Greg Lee > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Mike Pechkin > Sent: Jan 25, 2016 5:22 AM > To: picolisp@software-lab.de > Subject: fp + SunOS > > hi, > > 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 > > Mike > > -- UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picolisp@software-lab.de?subjectUnsubscribe
