On Fri, 10 Feb 2023 21:54:07 GMT, Joe Darcy wrote:
>> To help add assurances that the main-line port of FDLIBM to Java is working
>> correctly, added some long-running manual tests to probe that the
>> transliteration port and the corresponding StrictMath method are in
>> agreement on a large
On Fri, 10 Feb 2023 21:54:07 GMT, Joe Darcy wrote:
>> To help add assurances that the main-line port of FDLIBM to Java is working
>> correctly, added some long-running manual tests to probe that the
>> transliteration port and the corresponding StrictMath method are in
>> agreement on a large
On Fri, 10 Feb 2023 21:54:07 GMT, Joe Darcy wrote:
>> To help add assurances that the main-line port of FDLIBM to Java is working
>> correctly, added some long-running manual tests to probe that the
>> transliteration port and the corresponding StrictMath method are in
>> agreement on a large
> To help add assurances that the main-line port of FDLIBM to Java is working
> correctly, added some long-running manual tests to probe that the
> transliteration port and the corresponding StrictMath method are in agreement
> on a large number of argument, say, all float values.
>
> To test t
On Wed, 8 Feb 2023 17:07:22 GMT, Brian Burkhalter wrote:
>> To help add assurances that the main-line port of FDLIBM to Java is working
>> correctly, added some long-running manual tests to probe that the
>> transliteration port and the corresponding StrictMath method are in
>> agreement on a
On Mon, 6 Feb 2023 01:50:55 GMT, Joe Darcy wrote:
> To help add assurances that the main-line port of FDLIBM to Java is working
> correctly, added some long-running manual tests to probe that the
> transliteration port and the corresponding StrictMath method are in agreement
> on a large numbe
On Mon, 6 Feb 2023 01:50:55 GMT, Joe Darcy wrote:
> To help add assurances that the main-line port of FDLIBM to Java is working
> correctly, added some long-running manual tests to probe that the
> transliteration port and the corresponding StrictMath method are in agreement
> on a large numbe
On Mon, 6 Feb 2023 17:53:24 GMT, Joe Darcy wrote:
> Therefore, I think these tests should be included in the repository, but not
> run all the time, which led me to declare them as a manual jtreg test.
Manual tests are run at each release. There are a couple of examples in the
repo with tests
On Mon, 6 Feb 2023 17:53:24 GMT, Joe Darcy wrote:
> Therefore, I think these tests should be included in the repository, but not
> run all the time, which led me to declare them as a manual jtreg test.
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/12430
On Mon, 6 Feb 2023 09:18:35 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
> Manual tests are the tests of last resort :-) This test may be useful for the
> current transliteration work but it's not clear how this manual test would be
> run by someone tasked with running the manual tests. Right now, it looks like
>
On Mon, 6 Feb 2023 01:50:55 GMT, Joe Darcy wrote:
> To help add assurances that the main-line port of FDLIBM to Java is working
> correctly, added some long-running manual tests to probe that the
> transliteration port and the corresponding StrictMath method are in agreement
> on a large numbe
On Mon, 6 Feb 2023 01:50:55 GMT, Joe Darcy wrote:
> To help add assurances that the main-line port of FDLIBM to Java is working
> correctly, added some long-running manual tests to probe that the
> transliteration port and the corresponding StrictMath method are in agreement
> on a large numbe
To help add assurances that the main-line port of FDLIBM to Java is working
correctly, added some long-running manual tests to probe that the
transliteration port and the corresponding StrictMath method are in agreement
on a large number of argument, say, all float values.
To test the translite
13 matches
Mail list logo
