rtest_simplify_sum 52 & 54

The two tests fail because of the change to defint.lisp in rev 1.72. A
small modification to that change makes the problems go away:

Andrej


Index: defint.lisp
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/maxima/maxima/src/defint.lisp,v
retrieving revision 1.76
diff -u -r1.76 defint.lisp
--- defint.lisp	29 Apr 2010 01:15:50 -0000	1.76
+++ defint.lisp	26 May 2010 20:08:37 -0000
@@ -2854,7 +2854,8 @@
 	      ;; Make the substitution y=1/x.  If the integrand has
 	      ;; exactly the same form, the answer has to be 0.
 	      (return 0.))
-	     ((setq ans (logx1 exp ll ul))
+	     ((and (setq ans (logx1 exp ll ul))
+		   (free ans '%limit))
 	      (return ans))
 	     ((setq ans (antideriv exp))
 	      ;; It's easy if we have the antiderivative.


On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 8:46 PM, Dieter Kaiser <drdieterkaiser at web.de> wrote:
> 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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Maxima mailing list
> Maxima at math.utexas.edu
> http://www.math.utexas.edu/mailman/listinfo/maxima
>