octave-maintainers
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: xtest vs test


From: Doug Stewart
Subject: Re: xtest vs test
Date: Sun, 31 Jul 2016 11:44:22 -0400



On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 11:31 AM, John W. Eaton <address@hidden> wrote:
On 07/31/2016 10:43 AM, Carnë Draug wrote:

So here's a counter proposal.  Let's change all xtest into failing tests
(xtests on statistical tests can set rand seed), and add tests that we know
are failing from the bug tracker.

To avoid a flood of bug reports about the failing tests that we will waste a lot of time marking as duplicate and closing, I think we will also need to tag these tests with a bug report number and make it VERY obvious that they are known failures.  The test summary should be modified to display the failures as known, and there should be some indication of what it means to see a known failure.  Maybe we can handle this by modifying the xtest feature so that it can accept a bug report number or URL.

Showing known/unknown failures would be helpful to me because I look at the summary to see whether a change I just made introduced any NEW problems.  If there are suddenly many failing tests, I don't think I'll be able to remember what the "expected" number of failing tests is, especially if new failing tests are constantly being added to the test suite.  Then it will be more difficult to know whether a change has screwed something up, or if new failing tests have been added.

jwe




For this error the test is right close to the limit of precision that we use.
We can tweak residue to work for this example and then it will fail for the more common examples.
So -- should we even test examples that are close to the limit of precision or past  the limit of precision? 


>>>>> processing /home/doug/octavec/octave/scripts/polynomial/residue.m
***** xtest
 z1 =  7.0372976777e6;
 p1 = -3.1415926536e9;
 p2 = -4.9964813512e8;
 r1 = -(1 + z1/p1)/(1 - p1/p2)/p2/p1;
 r2 = -(1 + z1/p2)/(1 - p2/p1)/p2/p1;
 r3 = (1 + (p2 + p1)/p2/p1*z1)/p2/p1;
 r4 = z1/p2/p1;
 r = [r1; r2; r3; r4];
 p = [p1; p2; 0; 0];
 k = [];
 e = [1; 1; 1; 2];
 b = [1, z1];
 a = [1, -(p1 + p2), p1*p2, 0, 0];
 [br, ar] = residue (r, p, k, e);
 assert (br, b, 1e-8);
 assert (ar, a, 1e-8);
!!!!! known failure



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]