Peter Dalgaard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Aha! 100 times machine precision in not all that much when the numbers > themselves are in double digits. In fact, one is over 100. The case > that triggers the failure is #149 > > > 147 148 149 151 152 > > -1.598721e-14 -1.065814e-14 -2.842171e-14 -1.065814e-14 -2.131628e-14 > > which is 2 ULP off by my reckoning (scaling 35.15 to be between 0.5 > and 1 makes the error 2.842e-14/64 = 4.44e-16 and [EMAIL PROTECTED] > is 2.22e-16). > > So again, we might be too strict. I just wonder why we haven't heard > of this on any other platforms.
I've fixed the precision requirement (for this and the reg-tests-1 issue) in the repository and what should become tomorrow's beta version. -- O__ ---- Peter Dalgaard Blegdamsvej 3 c/ /'_ --- Dept. of Biostatistics 2200 Cph. N (*) \(*) -- University of Copenhagen Denmark Ph: (+45) 35327918 ~~~~~~~~~~ - ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) FAX: (+45) 35327907 ______________________________________________ R-devel@stat.math.ethz.ch mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
