On 28 September 2014 17:47, John Cremona <[email protected]> wrote: > I am getting a doctest failure in src/doc/en/bordeaux_2008/elliptic_curves.rst > and I wonder if others can confirm or deny. You should have > > sage: C = CremonaDatabase() > sage: C[37] > {'allcurves': {'a1': [[0, 0, 1, -1, 0], 1, 1], > 'b1': [[0, 1, 1, -23, -50], 0, 3], > 'b2': [[0, 1, 1, -1873, -31833], 0, 1], > 'b3': [[0, 1, 1, -3, 1], 0, 3]}} > > but with 6.4.beta4 + the optional larger database_cremona_ellcurve > installed I get something different because C[37] now has many more > fields and displays different ones first. It would be sensible to > replace the doctest as is with > > sage: C[37]['allcurves'] > {'a1': [[0, 0, 1, -1, 0], 1, 1], > 'b1': [[0, 1, 1, -23, -50], 0, 3], > 'b2': [[0, 1, 1, -1873, -31833], 0, 1], > 'b3': [[0, 1, 1, -3, 1], 0, 3]} > > I think this will have been caused by the new doctest output > formatting recently merged. >
Fix is up for review at http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/17062 > John > > > On 28 September 2014 13:46, Volker Braun <[email protected]> wrote: >> This is some more fallout from #16858. Jeroen, do you already have a >> followup ticket for numerical noise? >> >> >> >> On Saturday, September 27, 2014 9:51:46 PM UTC+1, Justin C. Walker wrote: >>> >>> >>> On Sep 27, 2014, at 07:51 , Volker Braun wrote: >>> >>> > As usual, get the updated "develop" git branch. Alternatively, >>> > self-contained source tarball is here: >>> > >>> > http://boxen.math.washington.edu/home/release/sage-6.4.beta4.tar.gz >>> >>> Built from the tarball on two OS X systems (10.6.8/Dual 6-core Xeons; >>> 10.9.5/Quad-core Core i7). Build completed successfully on each. >>> >>> On 10.9.5, the tests ('pteestlong') completed w/o problems. >>> On 10.6.8, there was one glitch, >>> sage -t --long --warn-long 84.6 >>> src/sage/rings/polynomial/polynomial_element.pyx >>> # 3 doctests failed >>> >>> The failures are repeatable. >>> >>> viz: >>> >>> File "src/sage/rings/polynomial/polynomial_element.pyx", line 5345, in >>> sage.ring >>> s.polynomial.polynomial_element.Polynomial.roots >>> Failed example: >>> ((x^3 -1)).roots() >>> Expected: >>> [(0.9999999999999998, 1)] >>> Got: >>> [(1.0000000000000002, 1)] >>> ********************************************************************** >>> File "src/sage/rings/polynomial/polynomial_element.pyx", line 5347, in >>> sage.ring >>> s.polynomial.polynomial_element.Polynomial.roots >>> Failed example: >>> ((x^3 -1)).roots(multiplicities=False) >>> Expected: >>> [0.9999999999999998] >>> Got: >>> [1.0000000000000002] >>> ********************************************************************** >>> File "src/sage/rings/polynomial/polynomial_element.pyx", line 5453, in >>> sage.ring >>> s.polynomial.polynomial_element.Polynomial.roots >>> Failed example: >>> for (fld_in, fld_out) in flds: >>> x = polygen(fld_in) >>> f = x^3 - fld_in(2) >>> x2 = polygen(fld_out) >>> f2 = x2^3 - fld_out(2) >>> for algo in (None, 'pari', 'numpy'): >>> rts = f.roots(ring=fld_out, multiplicities=False) >>> if fld_in == fld_out and algo is None: >>> print fld_in, rts >>> for rt in rts: >>> assert(abs(f2(rt)) <= 1e-10) >>> assert(rt.parent() == fld_out) >>> Expected: >>> Real Field with 53 bits of precision [1.25992104989487] >>> Real Double Field [1.2599210498948734] >>> Real Field with 100 bits of precision [1.2599210498948731647672106073] >>> Complex Field with 53 bits of precision [1.25992104989487, >>> -0.62996052494743 >>> ... - 1.09112363597172*I, -0.62996052494743... + 1.09112363597172*I] >>> Complex Double Field [1.259921049894873, -0.6299605249474364 - >>> 1.09112363597 >>> 17214*I, -0.6299605249474365 + 1.0911236359717214*I] >>> Complex Field with 100 bits of precision >>> [1.2599210498948731647672106073, -0 >>> .62996052494743658238360530364 - 1.0911236359717214035600726142*I, >>> -0.6299605249 >>> 4743658238360530364 + 1.0911236359717214035600726142*I] >>> Got: >>> Real Field with 53 bits of precision [1.25992104989487] >>> Real Double Field [1.259921049894873] >>> Real Field with 100 bits of precision [1.2599210498948731647672106073] >>> Complex Field with 53 bits of precision [1.25992104989487, >>> -0.62996052494743 >>> 7 - 1.09112363597172*I, -0.629960524947437 + 1.09112363597172*I] >>> Complex Double Field [1.2599210498948727, -0.6299605249474364 - >>> 1.0911236359 >>> 717214*I, -0.6299605249474362 + 1.0911236359717211*I] >>> Complex Field with 100 bits of precision >>> [1.2599210498948731647672106073, -0 >>> .62996052494743658238360530364 - 1.0911236359717214035600726142*I, >>> -0.6299605249 >>> 4743658238360530364 + 1.0911236359717214035600726142*I] >>> ********************************************************************** >>> >>> Justin >>> >>> -- >>> Justin C. Walker, Curmudgeon at Large >>> Institute for the Absorption of Federal Funds >>> ----------- >>> Like the ski resort full of girls hunting for husbands >>> and husbands hunting for girls, the situation is not >>> as symmetrical as it might seem. >>> - Alan MacKay >>> -- >>> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "sage-release" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-release. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-release" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-release. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
