From: Richard Kreckel Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2001 17:37:50 +0000 (+0000) Subject: * Hahaha! The second of the two tests was actually BS(tm) but this was only X-Git-Tag: release_1-0-0~19 X-Git-Url: https://www.ginac.de/ginac.git//ginac.git?p=ginac.git;a=commitdiff_plain;h=abc868b70eea6e434130c4d8d9916ae8f55db370 * Hahaha! The second of the two tests was actually BS(tm) but this was only triggered with nonvanishing probability on systems like IRIX with a weak rand() function. Added a little additional check to trap those cases. --- diff --git a/check/check_numeric.cpp b/check/check_numeric.cpp index 74dcf33b..ef5d7c3d 100644 --- a/check/check_numeric.cpp +++ b/check/check_numeric.cpp @@ -66,20 +66,30 @@ static unsigned check_numeric2(void) numeric nm(1,j); nm += numeric(int(20.0*rand()/(RAND_MAX+1.0))-10); // ...a numerator... - do { i_num = rand(); } while (i_num == 0); + do { + i_num = rand(); + } while (i_num<=0); numeric num(i_num); // ...and a denominator. - do { i_den = (rand())/100; } while (i_den == 0); + do { + i_den = (rand())/100; + } while (i_den<=0); numeric den(i_den); // construct the radicals: ex radical = pow(ex(num)/ex(den),ex(nm)); numeric floating = pow(num/den,nm); // test the result: if (is_a(radical)) { - clog << "(" << num << "/" << den << ")^(" << nm - << ") should have been a product, instead it's " - << radical << endl; - errorflag = true; + // This is very improbable with decent random numbers but it + // still can happen, so we better check if it is correct: + if (pow(radical,inverse(nm))==num/den) { + // Aha! We drew some lucky numbers. Nothing to see here... + } else { + clog << "(" << num << "/" << den << ")^(" << nm + << ") should have been a product, instead it's " + << radical << endl; + errorflag = true; + } } numeric ratio = abs(ex_to(evalf(radical))/floating); if (ratio>1.0001 && ratio<0.9999) {