#15921: work around Maxima fpprintprec bug and other ARM-specific problems
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: dimpase | Owner:
Type: defect | Status: needs_review
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-6.3
Component: calculus | Resolution:
Keywords: Maxima, | Merged in:
fpprintprec, ARM | Reviewers:
Authors: | Work issues:
Report Upstream: Reported | Commit:
upstream. Developers acknowledge | 079bb9af4f12892268a19f0d218ac96bd72466f4
bug. | Stopgaps:
Branch: |
u/dimpase/arm_fixes_etc |
Dependencies: |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by Snark):
Replying to [comment:6 dimpase]:
> Replying to [comment:5 Snark]:
> > "doctest" is both "doc" and "test" ; for the "test" part, making the
precision of computations explicit is nice, but for the "doc" part, those
computations are ugly: isn't it possible to do something better-looking?
>
> Do you mean to ask me do document adding things like `RealField(54)` ?
No : I mean if some poor user types "help(Gamma)" and gets explained in
the examples to type "RealField(54)(Gamma(6))", then that is bad.
I propose to let the computation be just "Gamma(6)" and add a tolerance
comment to check the answer ("# abs tol 1e-11"). That way we have a good
doc and a correct test, hence a nice doctest.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/15921#comment:7>
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.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
