Boost C++ Libraries: Ticket #5758: Boost.Test Floating-point comparison diagnostic output does not support radix 10

Paul A. Bristow — Tue, 05 Jun 2012 13:55:31 GMT

This is also essential for the proposed Boost.Multiprecision (and probably proposed fixed-point).

At 1.50

I:/boost-sandbox/big_number/libs/multiprecision/test/math/test_cpp_float_loopback.cpp(66): error : in "cpp_loopback_test_max": check l == b failed

[1e+2776234983093287513 != 1e+2776234983093287513]

which is most misleading (and nonsensical)

Patched as proposed to use max_digits10 above gives the correct (and sensible) display

I:/boost-sandbox/big_number/libs/multiprecision/test/math/test_cpp_float_loopback.cpp(66): error : in "cpp_loopback_test_max": check l == b failed

[1e+2776234983093287513 != 9.999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999e+2776234983093287512]

It would be very useful if this was corrected for 1.51 when Boost.Multiprecision will probably be included.

status changed; resolution set

Paul A. Bristow — Tue, 12 Jun 2012 11:20:38 GMT

status new → closed
resolution → fixed

Patch committed Completed: At revision: 78908

if( std::numeric_limits<T>::is_specialized && std::numeric_limits<T>::radix == 10 )

ostr.precision( 2 + std::numeric_limits<T>::max_digits10);

This assumes that any new radix 10 library will implement max_digits10 as it should to be standard compliant.

Paul A. Bristow — Thu, 14 Jun 2012 10:24:14 GMT

Comment out this until can find a way to check if max_digits10 is supported.

Thu, 14 Jun 2012 15:37:28 GMT

Also see bug 6986; I echo pbristow's third comment.

Jürgen Hunold — Sat, 16 Jun 2012 10:42:10 GMT

I tested John suggestion on the ML thread and successfully used BOOST_NO_NUMERIC_LIMITS_LOWEST. Patch attached. I will also ask on the ML.

attachment set

Jürgen Hunold — Sat, 16 Jun 2012 10:43:08 GMT

attachment → max_digits10.diff

Check for BOOST_NO_NUMERIC_LIMITS_LOWEST

Paul A. Bristow — Mon, 09 Jul 2012 13:50:09 GMT

Using John Maddock and Christopher Kormanyos mutliprecision currently under review

BOOST_AUTO_TEST_CASE(cpp_loopback_test_message) { Loopback.

using namespace boost::multiprecision;

cpp_dec_float_100 a = "1."; cpp_dec_float_100 b = "1."; b += 1e-100;

BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL(a, b);

} BOOST_AUTO_TEST_CASE(cpp_loopback_test_message)

Gives this misleading message

error : in "cpp_loopback_test_message": check a == b failed [1 != 1]

else if ( std::numeric_limits<T>::is_specialized && std::numeric_limits<T>::radix == 10 )

adding this to cater for radix 10

{

#ifdef BOOST_NO_NUMERIC_LIMITS_LOWEST No support for std::numeric_limits<double>::max_digits10; so guess that a couple of guard digits more than digits10 will display any difference.

ostr.precision( 2 + std::numeric_limits<T>::digits10 );

#else

std::numeric_limits<double>::max_digits10; IS supported. Any noisy or guard digits needed to display any difference are included in max_digits10.

ostr.precision( std::numeric_limits<T>::max_digits10 );

#endif

} else if T is not specialized, then will just get the default precision of 6 digits.

gives this more helpful mesage

in "cpp_loopback_test_message": check a == b failed [1 != 1.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000100000000000000001999]

BOOST_NO_NUMERIC_LIMITS_LOWEST is a proxy for support of max_digits10.

And seems to work in tests using Boost.Math.

At present only MSVC 10 and some gcc test platforms support max_digits10.

Sandia clang darwin trunk c++11 seems to fail with and without check for BOOST_NO_NUMERIC_LIMITS_LOWEST.

Please tell me immediately of any problem this revised version causes.

milestone changed

Paul A. Bristow — Fri, 13 Jul 2012 08:45:42 GMT

milestone Boost 1.48.0 → Boost 1.51.0