Am Mittwoch, den 26.05.2010, 13:11 -0500 schrieb Barton Willis:
> Tests rtest_simplify_sum 52 & 54 are marked as known failures, but they pass with my
> not quite CVS Maxima (a modified orthopoly for one). Is it just my Maxima or do these
> two tests need to be unmarked as known failures?
This is my current build info:
Maxima version: 5.20post
Maxima build date: 21:12 5/22/2010
Host type: i686-pc-linux-gnu
Lisp implementation type: SBCL
Lisp implementation version: 1.0.29.11.debian
With my build I both Problems 52 and 54 fails as expected:
********************** Problem 52 ***************
Input:
harmonic_number(n)
------------------ 2
n %pi
test_sum(sum(------------------, n, 1, inf), [], false, [], ----)
1 + n 6
Result:
inf
====
\ harmonic_number(n) 2
6 > ------------------ - %pi
/ 2
==== n + n
n = 1
---------------------------------
6
This differed from the expected result:
0
********************** Problem 54 ***************
Input:
harmonic_number(n)
------------------
2
n %
pi
ev(test_sum(sum(------------------, n, 1, inf), [], false, [rectform],
----),
n
12
2
sum_by_integral_transforms =
[logcontract])
Result:
2
4 realpart(li (2)) + 4 %i imagpart(li (2)) + 4 %i %pi log(2) - %pi
2 2
-------------------------------------------------------------------
4
This differed from the expected result:
0
> Also, I've been seeing a failure (Clozure CL) with rtest16 number 383. I'd guess
> this is just a problem with tolerance that is just a bit too small:
>
> Running tests in rtest16:
> ********************** Problem 383 ***************
> Input:
> block([numer : true], is(abs(zeta(%i + 3)
> - (1.10721440843141 - 0.148290867178175 %i)) < 1.0E-15))
>
>
> Result:
> false
>
> This differed from the expected result:
> true
I get this error too.
Dieter Kaiser