#12019: doctest failure in linear_programming.rst (multiple correct solutions)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Reporter: emil
| Owner: ncohen
Type: defect
| Status: new
Priority: minor
| Milestone: sage-4.8
Component: linear programming
| Keywords: doctests, linear programming,
GLPK, multible solutions
Work_issues: assessment if funtionality is tested elsewhere, if not create
TEST section with example with unique solution, change help docstring so users
are aware of multible solutions | Upstream: N/A
Reviewer:
| Author:
Merged:
| Dependencies:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Description changed by emil:
Old description:
> {{{
> sage -t -force_lib "devel/sage/doc/en/thematic_tutorials/
> linear_programming.rst"
> **********************************************************************
> File "/mnt/sda6/COMPILE/sage-4.7.2/devel/sage/doc/en/
> thematic_tutorials/linear_programming.rst", line 366:
>
> sage: [e for e,b in matching.iteritems() if b == 1]
>
> Expected:
>
> [(0, 1), (6, 9), (2, 7), (3, 4), (5, 8)]
>
> Got:
>
> [(1, 6), (0, 4), (2, 3), (5, 8), (7, 9)]
>
> **********************************************************************
> }}}
> The result is correct but it is different from the expected solution. The
> tested problem has multible solutions and it seems that the result os the
> example is machine dependent.
>
> the proposed fix is to flag the example as "not tested" and also to
> change the documentation that users are aware that there might be more
> than one solution.
>
> I don't know the reason for this dependency but Nathann Cohen mentioned
> it might depend on the GLPK library.
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/sage-
> devel/browse_thread/thread/e1886d5ba5ade945
New description:
{{{
sage -t -force_lib "devel/sage/doc/en/thematic_tutorials/
linear_programming.rst"
**********************************************************************
File "/mnt/sda6/COMPILE/sage-4.7.2/devel/sage/doc/en/
thematic_tutorials/linear_programming.rst", line 366:
sage: [e for e,b in matching.iteritems() if b == 1]
Expected:
[(0, 1), (6, 9), (2, 7), (3, 4), (5, 8)]
Got:
[(1, 6), (0, 4), (2, 3), (5, 8), (7, 9)]
**********************************************************************
}}}
The result is correct but it is different from the expected solution. The
tested problem has multiple solutions and it seems that the result of the
example is machine dependent.
The proposed fix is to flag the example as "not tested" and also to change
the documentation so that users are aware that there is more than one
correct solution.
I don't know the reason for this dependency but Nathann Cohen mentioned it
might depend on the GLPK library.
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-
devel/browse_thread/thread/e1886d5ba5ade945
--
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/12019#comment:1>
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.
