#14205: polybori doctests involve randomness
-------------------------------+--------------------------------------------
Reporter: tkluck | Owner: AlexGhitza
Type: enhancement | Status: new
Priority: minor | Milestone: sage-5.8
Component: algebra | Resolution:
Keywords: | Work issues:
Report Upstream: N/A | Reviewers:
Authors: | Merged in:
Dependencies: | Stopgaps:
-------------------------------+--------------------------------------------
Comment (by AlexanderDreyer):
Replying to [comment:1 vbraun]:
> I'd rather have the output of boost.Random doctested so we know when the
implementation changes. We also test all other RNGs to verify that the
sequence that they produce is actually the same, that is, we set the seed
correctly.
Well, I understood from the discussion here, that the test should not
depend on the random generator:
https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!topic/sage-devel/uSEWZrE-T_8
Also, sage-on-gentoo and sage-on-debian may use different versions of
boost than the original Sage.
An alternative could be that we '''additionally''' add (and document) the
generic tests and keep the explicit ones. This would simplify the bug hunt
next time.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/14205#comment:2>
Sage <http://www.sagemath.org>
Sage: Creating a Viable Open Source Alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica,
and MATLAB
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-trac" 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-trac?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
