|
Size: 30639
Comment:
|
← Revision 132 as of 2022-04-07 03:39:53 ⇥
Size: 0
Comment: outdated
|
| Deletions are marked like this. | Additions are marked like this. |
| Line 1: | Line 1: |
| = Final Pynac Switchover Push for Sage-4.0 = See also http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/5930 <<TableOfContents>> == Latest Pynac spkg == {{{ sage -f -m http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/mhansen/pynac-0.1.6-mh.p7.spkg }}} Note that we do "-f -m" so that spkg/build/pynac-0.1.6-mh.p7 is left around. Now you can do {{{ ./sage -sh cd spkg/build/pynac-0.1.6-mh.p7/src/ginac # change anything make install }}} William's patches: http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/wstein/symbolics/ Roberts's patches: http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/wstein/patches/pynac/ == Mike's Repo == On sage.math, do {{{ hg pull -u /scratch/mhansen/sage-3.4.2.alpha0-sage.math-only-x86_64-Linux/devel/sage-symbolics#symbolics_switch }}} And don't forget to do this from SAGE_ROOT the very first time: {{{ rm devel/sage/build/*/sage/symbolic/constants*; rm devel/sage/build/sage/symbolic/constants.so }}} == William's Repo == {{{ hg pull /home/wstein/build/sage-sym/devel/sage/sage/symbolic }}} == TODO: make a refreshed pickle jar == == TODO (later): == Make it so one can type {{{D[0](cot)}}} to get derivative of cotagent. This is relevant because repr of symbolic expressions should be parable by Sage, if possible. == DONE: linear_code.py -- lots of bugs when tested --long == * linear_code.py has numerous long long failures and segfaults. [[mabshoff remarks that this "just happens"..]] == DONE: Numerical Evaluation of infinity == in expression.pyx {{{ sage: t = x + oo; t +Infinity sage: t.n() +infinity }}} but it actually returns Infinity. == DONE: Segfault taking a real part == This is from problem R1 from [[symbench|symbench]] {{{ sage: def f(z): return sqrt(1/3)*z^2 + i/3 ....: sage: real(f(f(i/2))) /Users/wstein/build/sage-symbolics/local/bin/sage-sage: line 198: 92287 Segmentation fault sage-ipython "$@" -i bt gives: Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. [Switching to Thread 0x7fd959abe6e0 (LWP 5490)] import_submodule (mod=0xcfdf68, subname=0x7fff612d7fe8 "sage", fullname=0x7fff612d7fd0 "sage.rings.number_field.sage") at Python/import.c:2360 2360 Python/import.c: No such file or directory. in Python/import.c (gdb) bt #0 import_submodule (mod=0xcfdf68, subname=0x7fff612d7fe8 "sage", fullname=0x7fff612d7fd0 "sage.rings.number_field.sage") at Python/import.c:2360 #1 0x00000000004a166b in load_next (mod=0xcfdf68, altmod=0x72b440, p_name=<value optimized out>, buf=0x7fff612d7fd0 "sage.rings.number_field.sage", p_buflen=0x7fff612d7fc8) at Python/import.c:2220 #2 0x00000000004a18aa in import_module_level (name=0xd09499 "rings.number_field", globals=0x75a010, locals=<value optimized out>, fromlist=0x7fd954e95a70, level=<value optimized out>) at Python/import.c:2001 #3 0x00000000004a1d55 in PyImport_ImportModuleLevel (name=0xd09494 "sage.rings.number_field", globals=0x12e46e0, locals=0xa0b490, fromlist=0x7fd954e95a70, level=-1) at Python/import.c:2072 #4 0x00000000004813a9 in builtin___import__ (self=<value optimized out>, args=<value optimized out>, kwds=<value optimized out>) at Python/bltinmodule.c:47 #5 0x000000000041ab6d in PyObject_CallFunctionObjArgs (callable=0x7fd959a8a5f0) at Objects/abstract.c:1861 #6 0x00007fd944657a08 in __Pyx_Import (name=0xd09470, from_list=0x7fd954e95a70) at sage/rings/number_field/number_field_element.cpp:22933 #7 0x00007fd94468539d in __pyx_pf_4sage_5rings_12number_field_20number_field_element_18NumberFieldElement___init__ (__pyx_v_self=0x41786c8, __pyx_args=<value optimized out>, __pyx_kwds=<value optimized out>) at sage/rings/number_field/number_field_element.cpp:4568 #8 0x0000000000457bbc in wrap_init (self=0xcfdf68, args=0x7fff612d7fe8, wrapped=0x75a0a0, kwds=0x7fff612d7feb) at Objects/typeobject.c:4043 #9 0x0000000000417e63 in PyObject_Call (func=0xcfdf68, arg=0x7fff612d7fe8, kw=0x7fff612d7fd0) at Objects/abstract.c:1861 #10 0x0000000000481952 in PyEval_CallObjectWithKeywords (func=0x7fd954e88d10, arg=0x375eab8, kw=0x0) at Python/ceval.c:3442 }}} Maybe a simpler example: {{{ sage: real((1/9*(3*sqrt(1/3)*x^2 + I)^2*sqrt(1/3) + 1/3*I)(x=I)) /scratch/wstein/build/sage-symbolics/local/bin/sage-sage: line 198: 26443 Segmentation fault sage-ipython "$@" -i }}} A simple example where something is wrong (but no segfault): {{{ sage: ((sqrt(2)*x+I)^2*sqrt(2))(x=I).imag() 0*sqrt(2) }}} Even simpler: {{{ sage: ((sqrt(2)*I^2+I)*sqrt(2)).real() /scratch/wstein/build/sage-symbolics/local/bin/sage-sage: line 198: 11471 Segmentation fault sage-ipython "$@" -i }}} Even simpler: {{{ sage: (x*(I-I)+I)*x boom! sage: a = (x*(I-I)+I) sage: a 0*x + I sage: a*a /scratch/wstein/build/sage-symbolics/local/bin/sage-sage: line 198: 3083 Segmentation fault sage-ipython "$@" -i }}} == DONE hashing symbolic expressions is pretty bad == {{{ sage: hash(sin(1)) 3505120692 sage: var('x,y') (x, y) sage: hash(x^y) 0 }}} Hashs of powers are always 0. hash of sin is totally random. This is very bad. == DONE: pynac gcd: infinite recursion in to_polynomial(...) leads to crash == {{{ sage: var('n,x') (n, x) sage: g= (n+1)/x^n - n/x^n sage: g.collect_common_factors() /home/wstein/build/sage-3.4.2-symbolics/local/bin/sage-sage: line 198: 29952 Segmentation fault sage-ipython "$@" -i }}} Since the change in the definition of gcd of rational numbers in Sage, the gcd in pynac doesn't terminate in some cases. This can crash Sage as above. A quick fix might be to change sage.symbolic.pynac.py_gcd to handle gcd of rationals as before. AFAIK, collect_common_factors() is the only function we expose to the user that calls gcd() in pynac. -- burcin The above isn't the solution, unfortunately. Putting print statements in py_gcd shows it is never called with rational input for the above example. In fact it isn't even called by the collect_common_factors line. What happens is that there is an infinite recurssion in normal.cpp involving convering something to a polynomial. Fixed by commenting ou some code in normal.cpp {{{ }}} == (DONE) Get doctest coverage for symbolic/* directory up to 100% == As of May 12, 2009: {{{ callable.py: 100% (21 of 21) constants.py: 100% (59 of 59) constants_c.pyx: 100% (5 of 5) expression.pyx: 95% (136 of 142) expression_conversions.py: 100% (54 of 54) function.pyx: 100% (30 of 30) operators.py: 100% (4 of 4) pynac.pyx: 69% (16 of 23) ring.pyx: 100% (24 of 24) Overall weighted coverage score: 96.1% Total number of functions: 362 We need 10 more function to get to 99% coverage. }}} == Optional: Maybe compare is still too slow? == {{{ sage: a = [sqrt(w) for w in [0..100]] sage: time a.sort() CPU times: user 0.41 s, sys: 0.00 s, total: 0.41 s Wall time: 0.43 s }}} {{{ sage: L = [sqrt(SR(a)) for a in [1..1000]] sage: time v = [(a>0).variables() for a in L] CPU times: user 0.44 s, sys: 0.00 s, total: 0.44 s Wall time: 0.44 s sage: time v = [CIF(a) for a in L] CPU times: user 0.41 s, sys: 0.00 s, total: 0.41 s Wall time: 0.41 s sage: time v = [(a>0).test_relation() for a in L] CPU times: user 0.97 s, sys: 0.16 s, total: 1.13 s Wall time: 1.19 s }}} Profiling reveals a call to pari to factor is the culprit here in both cases. == DONE: Fix gamma(2+I-I) == {{{ sage: gamma(2+I-I) /scratch/wstein/build/sage-symbolics/local/lib/python2.5/site-packages/sage/functions/other.py:429: RuntimeWarning: tp_compare didn't return -1 or -2 for exception return x.gamma() Exception exceptions.TypeError: "unsupported operand type(s) for %: 'sage.rings.number_field.number_field_element_quadratic.NumberFieldElement_quadratic' and 'int'" in 'sage.symbolic.pynac.py_is_integer' ignored gamma(2) }}} == DONE: rm constants.crap == put this in spkg-install for now. {{{ rm -f devel/sage/build/*/sage/symbolic/constants*; rm -f devel/sage/build/sage/symbolic/constants.so }}} == (DONE) Fix latex(factorial(...)) == {{{ sage: latex(factorial(x)) \left(\text{x}\right)! (and another) }}} Both in functions/other.py == Optional: Optimize gcd/lcm == Optimize py_gcd and py_lcm in pynac.pyx for the case when both inputs are small integers. In fact, try to avoid calling pynac.pyx at all in that case (just use C++ directly). This gives major speedups on the benchmarks. == (DONE): Bug exhibited by code in ell_generic.py == There is a doctest in ell_generic.py that involves verifying that a symbolic point is on a curve. {{{ sage: temp 0 }}} It's a brand new doctest added to ell_generic.py today. According to Nick A., it is a that we don't see temp printing as 0. Note that {{{ sage: bool(temp==0) True }}} works fine. Nick remarks that {{{ ncalexan: The fact that it prints as a big mess is in fact a bug -- there's a symbolic pi that is being considered two different pynac objects. }}} == (Done) Run --long tests == Done and found that linear_code.py had issues... == (DONE): _sage_input_ gets broken, e.g., in complex_numper.pyx == I don't understand this but a doctest in complex_nubmer.pyx breaks due to _sage_input_'s implementation there uses SR in some clever way, but SR has changed so that -infinity is a lot smaller. I.e., SR is much more powerful, but that somehow breaks the test. == DONE: Test the tutorial and constructions guide == == (DONE): Segfault in taking (2*I)^(1/2) == {{{ sage: (2*I)^(1/2) /scratch/mhansen/sage-3.4.2.alpha0-sage.math-only-x86_64-Linux/local/bin/sage-sage: line 198: 25539 Segmentation fault sage-ipython "$@" -i }}} * patch available here: http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/burcin/pynac/power_helper.patch == (DONE) Possible precision issues with Real Interval field coercion == In this example, the last *two* digits displayed are wrong. This I think violates the basic rule about RIF, which is that only the last digit can be wrong. Note that nearly every doctest related to symbolics in real_interval field fails. {{{ sage: a = factorial(100)/exp(2) sage: RealIntervalField(10)(a) 1.2617?e157 sage: RealIntervalField(20)(a) 1.2630326?e157 }}} * This is almost certainly because {{{RIF(pi)}}} is *not* using mpfi to compute pi -- it is coercing pi to a {{{RealField}}}, then to {{{RIF}}}. Also related: {{{ sage: floor(SR(10^50 + 10^(-50))) 100000000000000007629769841091887003294964970946560 sage: RIF(sqrt(3)).diameter() == 0 True }}} * Mike has fixed this in his tree. == (DONE) Maxima *still* gets called way way too much == For example, right now, the code in expression.pyx for __nonzero__ does this: {{{ from sage.symbolic.ring import SR if self.is_relational(): res = relational_to_bool(self._gobj) if res is True: return True from sage.calculus.equations import SymbolicEquation return bool(SymbolicEquation(self.lhs(), self.rhs(), self.operator())) ... }}} Thus if one does {{{bool(a == b)}}} somewhere in some code, maxima is going to be used a lot evaluate that comparison. This is *not* good, since pynac should be doing *all* such comparisons. That's the whole point of switching to pynac. == (DONE) Issues with fast_callable == {{{ sage -t devel/sage/sage/ext/fast_callable.pyx ********************************************************************** File "/scratch/wstein/build/sage-sym/devel/sage-main/sage/ext/fast_callable.pyx", line 202: sage: f.op_list() Expected: [('load_arg', 0), ('ipow', 7), ('load_const', 1.0), 'add', 'sqrt', 'return'] Got: [('load_arg', 0), ('load_const', 7.0), 'pow', ('load_const', 1.0), 'add', 'sqrt', 'return'] ********************************************************************** File "/scratch/wstein/build/sage-sym/devel/sage-main/sage/ext/fast_callable.pyx", line 2211: sage: fast_callable(sin(x)/x, vars=[x], domain=RDF).get_orig_args() Expected: {'domain': Real Double Field, 'code': [0, 0, 16, 0, 0, 8, 2], 'py_constants': [], 'args': 1, 'stack': 2, 'constants': []} Got: {'domain': Real Double Field, 'code': [1, 0, 0, 0, 8, 0, 0, 16, 7, 2], 'py_constants': [], 'args': 1, 'stack': 2, 'constants': [1.0]} }}} About this robertwb says: {{{ robertwb: I don't like the ipow -> pow [9:37pm] robertwb: something fishy (perhaps) about that other one too [9:37pm] robertwb: the code stack looks a lot longer than it should }}} * Mike has fixed this in the branch. == (DONE) Assume is not finished == {{{ sage: assume(x>0) boom! }}} == (DONE) latexing symbolic compositions is busted == After fixing an obvious import error we have the following: {{{ sage: s = ceil(x) sage: latex(ceil(x)) \mbox{ceil}\left(x\right) sage: latex(floor(x)) \mbox{floor}\left(x\right) sage: ceil._latex_composition(x) '\\left \\lceil x \\right \\rceil' }}} Note that _latex_composition is never being called. I fixed this by making the _latex_ method for Expression first check to see if the operand has a _latex_composition method, and if so call it. == (DONE) Weird new numpy array conversion issue == NOW: {{{ import numpy; numpy.array([(pi,0)],dtype=float) Traceback (most recent call last): ... ValueError: setting an array element with a sequence. }}} But it used to do this: {{{ sage: import numpy; numpy.array([(pi,0)],dtype=float) array([[ 3.14159265, 0. ]]) }}} Solution: Make symbolic expressions not iterable. == (WONTFIX) Unpickling of old SymbolicExpressions == For backward compatibility, we need to be able to unpickle the old symbolic objects. Wstein: I say screw it and we just deprecate them immediately. Broking calculus pickles doesn't break *any* pickles outside of symbolic calculus. Plus, actually maintaining the old pickles would be _really_ hard. == (DONE) A serious printing BUG == {{{ sage: var('A,B,n') (A, B, n) sage: (A*B)^n A*B^n sage: f = (A*B)^n; f(A=5,B=5) 25^n }}} It's just a printing bug. Also we have {{{ sage: n*x^(n-1) n*x^((n - 1)) }}} http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/wstein/symbolics/pynac-fix_printing.patch and {{{ http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/wstein/symbolics/trac_5930-some_symbolic_doctests.patch http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/wstein/symbolics/trac_5930-some_symbolic_doctests-part2-add_pyrepr.patch }}} == (DONE) sqrt(2)^2 == {{{ sage: sqrt(x)^2 x sage: sqrt(2)^2 sqrt(2)^2 wstein@sage:~$ ginsh ginsh - GiNaC Interactive Shell (ginac V1.4.1) ... > sqrt(2)^2; 2 }}} Fix at http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/robertwb/patches/pynac-sqrt.patch == (DONE) sqrt(16) == {{{ sage: sqrt(SR(16)) sqrt(16) sage: 27^(1/3) 27^(1/3) $ ginsh > sqrt(16); 4 > 27 ^ (1/3); 3 }}} Fix at http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/robertwb/patches/pynac-pow.patch however == (DONE) sqrt(-4) segfaults == {{{ sage: sqrt(-4) ... seg fault ... }}} Fix at http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/robertwb/patches/pynac-rat-power.patch == (DONE) Small prime divisors square root simplification == {{{ sage: sqrt(27) sqrt(27) }}} refuses to be simplified (despite the code to do so being executed). == (DONE) Missing parentheses == {{{ sage: a = (2/3) ^ (2/3); str(a) '2/3^(2/3)' sage: latex(a) \frac{2}{3}^{\frac{2}{3}} sage: (-x)^(1/4) -x^(1/4) }}} == (DONE) Missing mathematica conversions == All should be capitalized: {{{ sage: (tan(x) + exp(x) + sin(x))._mathematica_init_() '(exp[x])+(Sin[x])+(tan[x])' }}} (seems like something we could do generically). * Fixed in Mike's branch. == (DONE) Number Fields == * _pow_ in number_field_element and _rational_ has some hacks since the Pynac library will cause infinite recursions. An example of a related bug {{{ sage: 2^I None }}} ... and Maxima is now running * http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/robertwb/patches/pynac-I-power.patch * http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/robertwb/patches/pynac-I-power-GINAC.patch == (DONE) Formal Derivatives == * Handling of fderivatives so that we can convert to Maxima. * Mike and Burcin came up with a clean solution that will only allow the conversion to be made when all of the arguments to the function are distinct variables. This covers the cases used by the differential equations interface. The fix is in Mike's tree. == (DONE) Massive Speed Regressions == * The massive speed regressions, making pynac symbolics *slower* than Maxima for some benchmarks. {{{ Pynac on May 9: sage: _=var('x,y,z'); f=expand((x+y+z)^6); g=f+1 sage: timeit('(f*g).expand()') 5 loops, best of 3: 241 ms per loop SAGE-3.2.3 with pynac: sage: _=var('x,y,z',ns=1); f=expand((x+y+z)^6); g=f+1 sage: timeit('(f*g).expand()') 125 loops, best of 3: 3.19 ms per loop Singular: sage: R.<x,y,z> = QQ[]; f=(x+y+z)^6; g=f+1 sage: timeit('h=f*g') 625 loops, best of 3: 29.7 µs per loop SAGE-3.2.3 (using Maxima on clisp; on ecl it can do this 3-4 times as fast): sage: _=var('x,y,z'); f=expand((x+y+z)^6); g=f+1 sage: timeit('(f*g).expand()') 5 loops, best of 3: 118 ms per loop }}} SOLUTION: This was caused entirely by py_is_real being ridiculously slow when input is an int or Integer. By special casing those cases, the problem goes away. == (DONE) I = sqrt(-1) == * The current handling of I as a wrapper around a number field element is a bit awkward since (I+2)*x can't be expanded as I+2 is "atomic". This also means that I.imag() returns 1.0 instead of 1. This causes issues in algebraic. Idea to solve this: {{{ Mike: I think what we want is just a QQ*I ring which automatically goes to SR when you do arithmetic with anything outside of it. me: ok. You suggested that before, and it makes some sense. Can't we just make a quadratic number field, and enhance it a tiny spec. Mike: I think if we had that, then everything should work out. Sent at 11:31 AM on Thursday me: That sounds easy enough, and it would be super fast, since quadratic fields are very very fast. Mike: We just don't have an exact way to work with complex numbers. me: robertwb could whip it out, as he wrote quadratic fields, etc. Mike: Yep For RR we have QQ, but we don't have quite an analogue for CC. }}} * Robert Bradshaw is going to work on this. * There is now a patch up at http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/6005 == Doctest status: May 15 == As of 11:40am, we are at: {{{ sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/rings/arith.py # 1 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/rings/complex_number.pyx # 1 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/calculus/wester.py # 7 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_generic.py # 1 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/functions/special.py # 7 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/symbolic/expression.pyx # 3 doctests failed Function Substitution --------------------- sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/calculus/var.pyx # 1 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/calculus/calculus.py # 2 doctests failed Pickling -------- sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/structure/sage_object.pyx # 1 doctests failed Derivative of Polylog --------------------- sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/functions/log.py # 3 doctests failed Extra Parens ------------ Look at the level in py_repr and py_latex sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/symbolic/tests.py # 2 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/functions/other.py # 2 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/functions/trig.py # 1 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/calculus/calculus.py # 1 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/symbolic/expression.pyx # 5 doctests failed Hashing ------- sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/symbolic/assumptions.py # 1 doctests failed }}} == Doctest status: May 14 == As of 1:03am, we have 53 failures in 18 files. {{{ sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/rings/arith.py # 1 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/rings/rational_field.py # 1 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/rings/complex_number.pyx # 1 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/structure/parent.pyx # 1 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/structure/sage_object.pyx # 1 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/calculus/var.pyx # 1 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/calculus/wester.py # 7 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/calculus/calculus.py # 4 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_generic.py # 1 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/functions/log.py # 3 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/functions/trig.py # 1 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/functions/special.py # 7 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/symbolic/pynac.pyx # 2 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/symbolic/function.pyx # 2 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/symbolic/tests.py # 2 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/symbolic/assumptions.py # 1 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/functions/other.py # 2 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/symbolic/expression.pyx # 15 doctests failed }}} == Doctest status: May 13 == As of 3:26pm, we have 106 failures in 16 files {{{ sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/rings/rational_field.py # 1 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/rings/arith.py # 1 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/rings/complex_number.pyx # 1 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/structure/sage_object.pyx # 1 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/calculus/var.pyx # 1 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/calculus/functional.py # 1 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/calculus/wester.py # 14 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/calculus/calculus.py # 4 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_generic.py # 2 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/functions/log.py # 13 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/functions/trig.py # 5 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/functions/special.py # 12 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/symbolic/tests.py # 2 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/functions/other.py # 16 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/symbolic/assumptions.py # 1 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/symbolic/expression.pyx # 31 doctests failed }}} == Doctest status: May 12 == As of 10:38am, we have 264 failures in 27 files. {{{ sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/quadratic_forms/extras.py # 1 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/matrix/tests.py # 1 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/rings/real_mpfi.pyx # 33 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/rings/rational_field.py # 1 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/rings/arith.py # 1 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/rings/complex_number.pyx # 1 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/rings/infinity.py # Segfault sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/rings/real_lazy.pyx # 1 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/rings/rational.pyx # 6 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/rings/qqbar.py # 1 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/rings/number_field/number_field_element.pyx # 0 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/rings/polynomial/polynomial_element.pyx # 2 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/structure/parent.pyx # 1 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/structure/sage_object.pyx # 1 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/calculus/var.pyx # 1 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/calculus/wester.py # 15 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/calculus/functional.py # 1 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/calculus/equations.py # 97 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/calculus/calculus.py # 4 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_generic.py # 2 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/functions/log.py # 13 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/functions/trig.py # 5 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/functions/other.py # 21 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/functions/special.py # 12 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/functions/piecewise.py # 7 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/symbolic/expression.pyx # 34 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage-symbolics/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_rational_field.py # 1 doctests failed }}} == Doctest status: May 9 == The failures as of May 9 at 4:19pm are here: http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/wstein/build/sage-sym/test-all-2.out Doctests fail in 59 distinct files. As of 7:08pm we have 47 files failing doctest files, and 766 failing doctests: http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/wstein/build/sage-sym/test-all-3.out Useful code snippet: {{{ sage: os.system('grep "doctests failed" test-all-3.out > a') sage: sum([int(x.split('#')[1].split()[0]) for x in open('a').readlines()]) 766 }}} As of 11:16pm, we have 38 files with failing doctests, and a total of 671 tests failing. {{{ sage -t devel/sage/sage/calculus/calculus.py # 50 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage/sage/calculus/desolvers.py # 12 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage/sage/calculus/equations.py # 115 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage/sage/calculus/functional.py # 27 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage/sage/calculus/functions.py # 6 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage/sage/calculus/test_sympy.py # 13 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage/sage/calculus/var.pyx # 11 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage/sage/calculus/wester.py # 18 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage/sage/ext/fast_callable.pyx # 2 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage/sage/functions/hyperbolic.py # 11 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage/sage/functions/log.py # 13 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage/sage/functions/other.py # 26 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage/sage/functions/piecewise.py # 39 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage/sage/functions/special.py # 12 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage/sage/functions/trig.py # 23 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage/sage/interfaces/qepcad.py # 29 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage/sage/rings/complex_number.pyx # 1 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage/sage/rings/integer.pyx # 2 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage/sage/rings/rational_field.py # 1 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage/sage/rings/rational.pyx # 1 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage/sage/rings/real_double.pyx # 1 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage/sage/rings/real_lazy.pyx # 1 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage/sage/rings/real_mpfi.pyx # 33 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_generic.py # 1 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage/sage/structure/sage_object.pyx # 1 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage/sage/symbolic/callable.py # 2 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage/sage/symbolic/constants.py # 29 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage/sage/symbolic/expression_conversions.py # 6 doctests failed sage -t devel/sage/sage/symbolic/expression.pyx # 135 doctests failed DONE sage -t devel/sage/sage/calculus/tests.py # 38 doctests failed DONE sage -t devel/sage/sage/interfaces/expect.py # 1 doctests failed DONE sage -t devel/sage/sage/interfaces/gp.py # 2 doctests failed DONE sage -t devel/sage/sage/plot/plot3d/transform.pyx # 1 doctests failed DONE sage -t devel/sage/sage/rings/arith.py # 4 doctests failed DONE sage -t devel/sage/sage/rings/complex_interval_field.py # 1 doctests failed DONE sage -t devel/sage/sage/rings/real_mpfr.pyx # 1 doctests failed DONE sage -t devel/sage/sage/sets/set.py # 1 doctests failed DONE sage -t devel/sage/sage/structure/element.pyx # 1 doctests failed }}} == Doctest status: May 7-8 == As of right now -- May 7 at 11:38 am, doing sage -tp 20 devel/sage/sage results in http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/wstein/build/sage-3.4.2-symbolics/test-all.out Doctests fail in 90 files. Nearly all of the errors have to do with sqrt, specifically, {{{ sage: sqrt(SR(16)) sqrt(16) sage: sqrt(16 + x - x) sqrt(16) }}} and {{{ $ grep "CombinatorialFreeModule instance as first argument" /home/wstein/build/sage-3.4.2-symbolics/test-all.out | wc 240 4080 34320 }}} The issue is that ginac treats sqrt(x) as having an ambiguous sign, whereas before we choose a branch. The symbolic sqrt(perfect_square) is used all over in the library, so I think we need to allow this. We should not, however, simplify sqrt(x^2). * mhansen has fixed the failures in misc/ below in his branch. * robertwb is looking at the failures in structure/ and matrix/ * quadratic_forms all pass now * Much weirdness (e.g. the {{{CombinatorialFreeModule.basis}}} error) fixed by http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/robertwb/patches/pynac-sqrt.patch * Some powering issues fixed in http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/robertwb/patches/pynac-pow.patch * sage -tp 20 devel/sage/sage (May 8, 6am) at http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/robertwb/sage-3.4.2-symbolics/annotated.log (annotated) {{{ Of 499 failed doctests: 216 were equal 89 were not equal 194 were incomparable. }}} |
