#4446: New module complex_mpc using lib mpc for complex multiprecision
arithmetic
-------------------------------------------+--------------------------------
Reporter: thevenyp | Owner: mabshoff
Type: enhancement | Status: needs_info
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-4.4.4
Component: basic arithmetic | Keywords:
Author: | Upstream: N/A
Reviewer: William Stein, David Kirkby | Merged:
Work_issues: |
-------------------------------------------+--------------------------------
Changes (by drkirkby):
* status: needs_review => needs_info
* reviewer: => William Stein, David Kirkby
Comment:
Replying to [comment:36 ylchapuy]:
>
>
> ok, my fault, I didn't tried the spkg-check. (is the one in the mpfr
spkg working???) It should be corrected with the brand new
>
> http://yann.laiglechapuy.net/spkg/mpc-0.8.3-dev-svn793.spkg
>
> at least, it works for me... same proc, os, etc
> {{{
> ===================
> All 57 tests passed
> ===================
> }}}
mpc-0.8.3-dev-svn793.spkg (md5 checksum 07e1b56fe1e551138b8862d5551d6948)
passed all 57 tests on both machines I have tested on.
* Sun Blade 1000, UltraSPARC III+ processors, Solaris 10 03/2005
32-bit mode.
* Sun Ultra 27, quad core Xeon processor, !OpenSolaris 06/2009 in
64-bit mode.
However, it seems a long way before this could get a positive review and
be incorporated into Sage.
* William has made quite extensive comments - in particular the fact it
could '''not''' be "optional" so would have to be a standard part of Sage.
* Nobody has agreed to maintain it. I believe there is a requirement for
any standard package that someone agrees to maintain it for 2 years.
* For the package to become "standard" it needs a vote.
* I don't like the idea of using a SVN snapshot unless necessary. This is
not based on a stable release of MPC, yet I believe it would have to
become a standard part of Sage. That seems a bad idea in my opinion.
* It appears to have undergone very little testing. When I noticed the
test suite had failed, you remarked you had not run the tests. When
several months ago I asked if it had been tested on Solaris, nobody
responded.
* Has it been tested on OS X? If so, what processors?
* Are you aware Sage is suppose to support all these platforms. What
subset of these has MPC been tested on?
{{{
PROCESSOR OPERATING SYSTEM
x86 32-bit Linux -- Debian, Ubuntu, CentOS (=Red Hat),
Fedora, openSUSE, Mandriva, Arch
x86_64 64-bit Linux -- Debian, Ubuntu, CentOS (=Red Hat),
Fedora, openSUSE, Mandriva, Arch
IA-64 Itanium 2 64-bit Linux -- Red Hat, SUSE
x86 Apple Mac OS X 10.4.x, 10.5.x, 10.6.x
PPC Apple Mac OS X 10.4.x, 10.5.x, 10.6.x
SPARC Solaris 10
}}}
* Have the doc tests been run on different hardware? Would results be
affected by different floating point processors, so that the doc tests
might need to consider this.
I would add, I have a lot of respect for Paul Zimmermann, so I would tend
to trust code he is associated with.
It just strikes me that this is going to need a lot more than one positive
review to become part of Sage. I believe any competent reviewer will ask
for more proof this would be a good addition to Sage. At the moment,
whilst the fact Paul is associated with this code would tend to make me
think it is well tested, as a package in Sage, there seems to be little
evidence presented that this has undergone much testing. Given its based
on a snapshot, makes me even more suspicious.
A few others points.
* One of the attachments says it is released under the GPL, but does not
state the version. I believe it should say "GPL version 2, or (at your
option) any later version."
* As for your question about the MPFR test suite, if you look at MPFR's
spkg-install you will see that the test suite is run every time Sage is
built. That is because the test suite tended to fail quite regularly with
buggy compilers, or buggy operating systems, so it was wise to test it on
every Sage build.
* What does the '793' in the .spkg mean? I assumed at first it was a
revision, but now see that is unchanged, whilst the number in the package
has changed from 0.8.2 to 0.8.3.
Dave
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/4446#comment:37>
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 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.
