Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date.
GMANE provides an alternative service for most mailing lists. c.f. bug 424647
On Sunday 26 June 2011 14:21:11 Barry Schwartz wrote:
> Volker Armin Hemmann <volkerarmin@...> skribis:
> > ok, I tried ekopath:
> >
> > UCBFAIL indicates problems!
> > /tmp/usbtest/ccos_DP.output: ucbtest UCBFAIL in COS(X) at line 444 for
> > generic /tmp/usbtest/cexp_DP.output: ucbtest UCBFAIL in EXP(X) at line
> > 444 for generic /tmp/usbtest/clib_DP.output: ucbtest UCBFAIL in ceild
> > at line 701 for double /tmp/usbtest/clib_DP.output: ucbtest UCBFAIL in
> > coshd at line 701 for double /tmp/usbtest/clib_DP.output: ucbtest
> > UCBFAIL in floord at line 701 for double
> > /tmp/usbtest/clib_DP.output:UCBFAIL clib_DP.output , 25 out of 25 tests
> > completed
> > /tmp/usbtest/csin_DP.output: ucbtest UCBFAIL in SIN(X) at line 444 for
> > generic
> >
> > only 10 out of 14 show UCBPASS!
>
> That must be what they mean by "Industry proven robustness and
> quality"
no, that probably means that the 'problem' is
either not a problem at all. Failing some test and not being accurate or being
wrong or even not following some standard are very different thins
or not caused by the compilers but something else. Like libc, libm, etc.
--
#163933
|
|
