#4544: [with patch, positive review] comparison of CDF (or any inexact) elements
needs fixing
------------------------+---------------------------------------------------
Reporter: craigcitro | Owner: jkantor
Type: defect | Status: new
Priority: blocker | Milestone: sage-3.3
Component: numerical | Resolution:
Keywords: |
------------------------+---------------------------------------------------
Comment (by mabshoff):
Carl says:
{{{
[11:50am] cwitty: I won't have time to actually apply the patch and run
doctests until this evening.
[11:50am] cwitty: Reading the patch, it looks entirely reasonable.
[11:51am] cwitty: As release manager, will you accept that sort of review?
[12:01pm] mabs: cwitty: yes
[12:02pm] mabs: I am just crossing ts and dotting is here
[12:02pm] mabs: I posted another patch which partially reverted #5129, so
it blew up on geom.
[12:02pm] mabs: Good that I tested
[12:04pm] cwitty: OK, positive review.
}}}
So we are good to go. Note that one of the issues Craig raises is
{{{
sage: [ f(x[0]).is_zero() for x in f.roots() ]
[False, False, False, False, False]
}}}
which is not resolved by this ticket.
Craig: If you think this is worth a follow up ticket please open such a
ticket.
Cheers,
Michael
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/4544#comment:8>
Sage <http://sagemath.org/>
Sage - Open Source Mathematical Software: Building the Car Instead of
Reinventing the Wheel
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-trac" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
