[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #63787] test pcg may fail at high optimization
From: |
Rik |
Subject: |
[Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #63787] test pcg may fail at high optimization |
Date: |
Sat, 11 Feb 2023 12:36:00 -0500 (EST) |
Follow-up Comment #3, bug #63787 (project octave):
I agree with the general programming practice that floating point numbers
should not be compared directly to integers. However, is this example
specifically engineered so that the calculations should result in perfect
equality? A silly example, but "2.0 + 2.0 == 4" and I don't want to have any
tolerance on this test because even using floating point numbers this
calculation should hold exactly.
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?63787>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/
- [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #63787] test pcg may fail at high optimization, Dmitri A. Sergatskov, 2023/02/10
- [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #63787] test pcg may fail at high optimization, Arun Giridhar, 2023/02/10
- [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #63787] test pcg may fail at high optimization, Dmitri A. Sergatskov, 2023/02/10
- [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #63787] test pcg may fail at high optimization,
Rik <=
- [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #63787] test pcg may fail at high optimization, Dmitri A. Sergatskov, 2023/02/11
- [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #63787] test pcg may fail at high optimization, Dmitri A. Sergatskov, 2023/02/11
- [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #63787] test pcg may fail at high optimization, Rik, 2023/02/11
- [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #63787] test pcg may fail at high optimization, Dmitri A. Sergatskov, 2023/02/11
- [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #63787] test pcg may fail at high optimization, Rik, 2023/02/11