[math] Help needed porting to AMD64/Linux platforms
Folks, I'm still having trouble with some failures that appear to be specific to Linux on AMD64, if anyone with access to such a platform can help me out I'd be most grateful. You can test whether your machine exhibits the issue by: cd into libs/math/test and bjam gcc test_hypergeometric_dist1 If that fails, then I'm looking for the output from the following program to try and track down the cause of the error (caution this will be quite voluminous!): #define BOOST_MATH_INSTRUMENT #include "boost/math/distributions.hpp" int main() { double x = 30520, r = 130605, n = 130605, N = 523360, p = 1.315394088731268169855067478460234e-53, q = 1; boost::math::hypergeometric_distribution<> hyp(r, n, N); unsigned x_found = quantile(hyp, p); BOOST_MATH_INSTRUMENT_VARIABLE(x_found); return 0; } Perplexed yours, John.
John Maddock wrote:
Folks,
I'm still having trouble with some failures that appear to be specific to Linux on AMD64, if anyone with access to such a platform can help me out I'd be most grateful.
You can test whether your machine exhibits the issue by:
cd into libs/math/test and bjam gcc test_hypergeometric_dist1
If that fails, then I'm looking for the output from the following program to try and track down the cause of the error (caution this will be quite voluminous!):
#define BOOST_MATH_INSTRUMENT #include "boost/math/distributions.hpp"
int main() { double x = 30520, r = 130605, n = 130605, N = 523360, p = 1.315394088731268169855067478460234e-53, q = 1;
boost::math::hypergeometric_distribution<> hyp(r, n, N); unsigned x_found = quantile(hyp, p); BOOST_MATH_INSTRUMENT_VARIABLE(x_found);
return 0; }
Perplexed yours, John.
Hi John, The output is quite big as you promised - 268K I guess this would be too large for the mailing list. Should I send it directly to your personal mail address instead? Best Regards, Gevorg
Do you need any other tests? Different gcc versions maybe? I have gcc-4.3.2 and (with a little effort) some verions of gcc-4.4
Do you need any other tests? Different gcc versions maybe? I have gcc-4.3.2 and (with a little effort) some verions of gcc-4.4
At present I "just" need to find a fix for the platform that does reproduce the issue, after that it might be useful to test with other gcc versions, but this appears to be a CPU issue, not a compiler one. Thanks, John. PS, but I may get back to you on this later if that's OK!
participants (3)
-
Gevorg Voskanyan -
John Maddock -
Neal Becker