| Thread Previous • Date Previous • Date Next • Thread Next |
On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 11:17 AM, Anders Logg <logg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 10:12:43AM +0100, Garth N. Wells wrote: >> >> >> Anders Logg wrote: >> > On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 10:06:00AM +0100, Garth N. Wells wrote: >> >> >> >> Anders Logg wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 09:40:05AM +0200, Johannes Ring wrote: >> >>>> On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 2:46 PM, Anders Logg <logg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>>>> Why is the buildbot failing for FFC on winxp-mingw32? Is this >> >>>>> something that could be fixed? >> >>>> The problem is that floats are represented slightly differently >> >>>> because of the underlying C library. On Windows, float(1e-8) is 1e-008 >> >>>> while it is 1e-08 on Ubuntu. >> >>> I don't understand why this should matter. Where does this problem show up? >> >>> >> >> When performing a diff on the generated and reference files. >> > >> > You mean the regression test fail just because floats are formatted >> > differently on the two platforms? >> > >> >> Yes. > > Johannes, could you send an example of a test that fails so I can look > at it in detail? Most of the tests fail with the same error. Have looked at the output from the tests on Windows? You can find it here: http://fenics.org:8080/builders/ffc-winxp-mingw32/builds/352/steps/ffc%20check/logs/stdio > I won't be able to test myself on Windows, but > perhaps you can find some solution by modifying the following lines in > > ffc/compiler/ufcformat.py: > > # Set number of digits for floating point and machine precision > precision = int(options["precision"]) > f1 = "%%.%dg" % precision > f2 = "%%.%de" % precision > def floating_point(v): > if abs(v) < 100.0: > return f1 % v > else: > return f2 % v > self.format["floating point"] = floating_point Yes, I will take a look. Johannes > -- > Anders > > >> Garth >> >> > That should be easy to fix since all floats are formatted through a >> > common function in FFC. We could fix that function to produce the same >> > results. >> > >> >> Garth >> >> >> >>>> BTW: The buildbot failed the FFC checks last night. No report was sent >> >>>> to the list because I have experimented with bug reports directly to >> >>>> launchpad. Obviously it did not work (problems with GPG signing of the >> >>>> mail). >> >>> ok. >> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> FFC-dev mailing list >> >> FFC-dev@xxxxxxxxxx >> >> http://www.fenics.org/mailman/listinfo/ffc-dev >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> FFC-dev mailing list >> >> FFC-dev@xxxxxxxxxx >> >> http://www.fenics.org/mailman/listinfo/ffc-dev >> _______________________________________________ >> FFC-dev mailing list >> FFC-dev@xxxxxxxxxx >> http://www.fenics.org/mailman/listinfo/ffc-dev > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) > > iEYEARECAAYFAkq5564ACgkQTuwUCDsYZdHdsQCfaqS+MynsUBQeb3ijBT0+XLjN > xUYAn12+mKEit0gqF1S1mxPPXBbdM3tF > =XJsA > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > _______________________________________________ > FFC-dev mailing list > FFC-dev@xxxxxxxxxx > http://www.fenics.org/mailman/listinfo/ffc-dev > >
| Thread Previous • Date Previous • Date Next • Thread Next |
