Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

🛣️ The long and treacherous road to compliance with the ITF1788 test suite #225

Closed
miguelraz opened this issue Sep 20, 2018 · 7 comments

Comments

@miguelraz
Copy link

miguelraz commented Sep 20, 2018

I'm opening this issue as a roadmap in order to track what needs to be done in order to achieve compliance with the ITF1788 test suite. It'll update as PRs/issues get handled. This table was obtained by building the latest test suite (deps: python3, ply, yaml) and running the test suite manually.

Summary:

Road to compliance Tracking issues/PRs? No missing functionality? No Missing tests? Error Free? Good to go?
abs_rev.jl #13 ✔️
atan2.jl #15 ✔️
c-xsc.jl ✔️
fi_lib.jl
ieee1788-constructors.jl #219,#221
ieee1788-exceptions.jl #222
ieee1788-bool.jl #219
ieee1788-cancel.jl ✔️
ieee1788-class.jl
ieee1788-elem.jl #219, #223
ieee1788-mul_rev.jl
ieee1788-num.jl #219
ieee1788-overlap.jl #224
ieee1788-rec_bool.jl ✔️
ieee1788-reduction.jl
ieee1788-rev.jl
ieee1788-set.jl ✔️
mpfi.jl
pow_rev.jl
@ignacio-vc
Copy link

Very handy, thank you. I'll make sure to contribute in short order

@dpsanders dpsanders changed the title 🛣️ The long and treacherous road to ITF1788 compliance 🛣️ The long and treacherous road to IEEE 1788-2015 compliance Sep 21, 2018
@dpsanders dpsanders changed the title 🛣️ The long and treacherous road to IEEE 1788-2015 compliance 🛣️ The long and treacherous road to compliance with the ITF1788 test suite Sep 21, 2018
@dpsanders
Copy link
Member

Thanks a lot for this @miguelraz!

@miguelraz
Copy link
Author

No probs. 3 questions.

  1. The PRs for contractors should go into IntervalContractors.jl, right?
  2. Missing test sets - how should we generate those for stuff like atan2 and others? Ping the ITF1788 repo?
  3. Non-ieee1788 files - are they part of the standard? Priority? There's some hairy bugs in the mpfi.jl file that seem to, at first glance, cause problems upstream with MPFI.jl. Should we look into those versions

Tomorrow I will upload the latest versions of the tests to a standalone repo.
Maybe a BinaryBuilder.jl solution is in order later to automatize pulling the test autogeneration script + dependencies, creating the files, and PRing into its own repo.

@ignacio-vc
Copy link

ignacio-vc commented Sep 21, 2018

@miguelraz I could look into automating that, as well as this other issue in ValidatedNumerics I've been working on. I'll keep you posted on progress through incoming issues/PRs

@miguelraz
Copy link
Author

Cool beans.
I uploaded the latest test files here and will be PRing my changes into that repo for the while being.

@miguelraz
Copy link
Author

miguelraz commented Sep 27, 2018

Pending a PR (oheim/ITF1788#15), atan2.jl should be good to go testwise.
Updated the table.

@lucaferranti
Copy link
Member

superseeded by #465

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants