Re: Tests for slicing of sparse matrices

[Kim Hansen]

On Jan 8, 2008 9:31 AM, David Bateman <address@hidden> wrote:
> Kim Hansen wrote:
> > I wrote some test for slicing sparse matrices in December, here they are.
> >
> > They have 9 expected errors where sparse and full matrices do not do
> > the same. Should I rewrite those tests in order to not call it
> > expected errors, if that is the behaviour we want from the sparse
> > matrices?
> >
> The reason for the 9 failing tests is that this is the behavior of
> Matlab itself and so they can't really be said to be failing. Therefore,
> I'd say comment out the failing tests before this is included in octave
> itself. Also all of these tests are real matrix only and it probably
> makes sense to have at least complex versions of the same tests. Though
> the code that these tests exercise is all in Sparse<T>::assign and
> Sparse<T>::assign1 functions so the same code is exercised in both case,
> this might not always be the case, and having the same tests with
> different matrix types might avoid issues in the future.

The 9 xtests has been changed to asserts that tests positive against
the current behaviour of octave.


2008-01-10  Kim Hansen  <address@hidden>

      * test/test_slice_sparse.m: Tests for slicing of sparse matrices

-- 
Kim Hansen
Vadgårdsvej 3, 2.tv
2860 Søborg
Fastnet: 3956 2437  --  Mobil: 3091 2437

test_slice_sparse.patch
Description: Text Data