Re: [Boost-users] [Math] Accuracy test failures on QNX 6.4.0

Niklas Angare wrote:

...

I've discovered that that the results are the same with GNU libstdc++ as with Dinkumware. But I belive they both bring in the math functions from libm.so.2.

...

Anyhow, I'm stumped by what the issue could be now, so can you let me have the output of the program below?

Here it is:

Thanks, I believe it's a bug in the elliptic integral code, I'll check in a fix shortly and we'll see what happens to the results, in the mean time can you let me have the result of running the program below (*after* you've done an SVN update, as I've had to update the debugging/tracing code) so I can see what some of the other failures are doing? Thanks, John. #define BOOST_MATH_INSTRUMENT #include #include int main() { std::cout << std::setprecision(30); boost::math::concepts::real_concept r = boost::math::expint<long double>(22, 0.5L); std::cout << r << std::endl; r = boost::math::beta<long double>(150.599945068359375L, 306722.0L, 0.91338449716567993164L); std::cout << r << std::endl; r = boost::math::gamma_p_invboost::math::real_concept(16.18250274658203125L, 0.007907813991753274790426L); std::cout << r << std::endl; r = boost::math::cyl_neumann<long double>(0, 1000); std::cout << r << std::endl; }