#9002: Noise on PPC Mac in parametric_surface.pyx
------------------------+---------------------------------------------------
Reporter: kcrisman | Owner: tbd
Type: defect | Status: needs_review
Priority: minor | Milestone: sage-4.5
Component: doctest | Keywords:
Author: | Upstream: N/A
Reviewer: | Merged:
Work_issues: |
------------------------+---------------------------------------------------
Comment(by drkirkby):
Replying to [comment:3 kcrisman]:
> David, I realize this is a decision regarding how far back to look for
numerical consistency, and I agree than for things like `gamma(2.3)` it
would be very good to ensure maximum consistency. But here the whole
point is a heuristic to get a box that encloses the figure, and
differences at that level of accuracy are irrelevant and take resources
away from other badly needed improvements to Sage. So it is unfortunate
that we won't track it down, but it is reasonable, I think.
Fair enough. Your point is taken. I just tend to "see red" when I see
numerical noise fixes, where it appears the original "expected" value just
seems to be based on what someone happened to get on their computer on
that particular day, with no further reasoning. Then when it fails,
someone adds a few dots and it magically passes. IMHO, too many people
seem happy to do this.
But in this case, I can see where you are coming from. Tracing the exact
value would be a pointless waste of time.
<moan> Personally, where is is possible, I'd like to see high precision
numerical values put as a comment in a doc test. So your gamma(2.3) would
record a value like
1.16671190519816034504188144120291793853399434971946889397020666387 and
say what method was used to get it. Then if code is updated and tests
fail, we could question the changes more objecitively than just fixing
them by adding a few dots. Ideally such a number should shows results from
a independent methods. </moan>
Dave
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/9002#comment:4>
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.
