From chrisd at sci.kun.nl Tue Sep 16 18:40:07 2003 From: chrisd at sci.kun.nl (Chris Dams) Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 16:40:07 +0000 (UTC) Subject: improvement for error message. Message-ID: Hello, In the function ex::subs(const ex & e, unsigned options) if the first argument is neither a relation_equal nor a list, the error message "basic::subs(ex): argument must be a list" gets thrown. I think it would be a good idea to change this into "basic::subs(ex): argument must be a relation_equal or list". Imagine me trying to type a relation_equal, getting some parentheses wrong and ending up with something that is not a relation_equal nor a list. In that case the former error message makes me think "when did it happen that I cannot use a relation anymore as the argument of a substitution". The latter error message might put me on the right track of starting to wonder why the thing I thought was a relation turns out not to be. Bye, Chris Dams From chrisd at sci.kun.nl Tue Sep 16 18:44:21 2003 From: chrisd at sci.kun.nl (Chris Dams) Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 16:44:21 +0000 (UTC) Subject: improvement for error message. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Tue, 16 Sep 2003, Chris Dams wrote: > In the function ex::subs(const ex & e, unsigned options) if the first > argument is neither a relation_equal nor a list, the error message > "basic::subs(ex): argument must be a list" gets thrown. I think it would > be a good idea to change this into "basic::subs(ex): argument must be a > relation_equal or list". Imagine me trying to type a relation_equal, > getting some parentheses wrong and ending up with something that is not a > relation_equal nor a list. In that case the former error message makes me > think "when did it happen that I cannot use a relation anymore as the > argument of a substitution". The latter error message might put me on the > right track of starting to wonder why the thing I thought was a relation > turns out not to be. Of course, in the above, basic::subs should be ex::subs. I was still working with an old version of GiNaC. From Christian.Bauer at Uni-Mainz.DE Thu Sep 18 17:38:27 2003 From: Christian.Bauer at Uni-Mainz.DE (Christian Bauer) Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 17:38:27 +0200 Subject: improvement for error message. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20030918153826.GC1456@thep.physik.uni-mainz.de> Hi! On Tue, Sep 16, 2003 at 04:40:07PM +0000, Chris Dams wrote: > In the function ex::subs(const ex & e, unsigned options) if the first > argument is neither a relation_equal nor a list, the error message > "basic::subs(ex): argument must be a list" gets thrown. I think it would > be a good idea to change this into "basic::subs(ex): argument must be a > relation_equal or list". Done. :) Bye, Christian -- / Physics is an algorithm \/ http://www.uni-mainz.de/~bauec002/ From anaximander at gmx.de Fri Sep 26 13:02:21 2003 From: anaximander at gmx.de (anaximander at gmx.de) Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 13:02:21 +0200 (MEST) Subject: installation problem and/or internal error of GiNaC 1.1.3 Message-ID: <9691.1064574141@www53.gmx.net> Hallo (in Mainz spricht man noch Deutsch, oder?) anbei schicke ich ein C++ Programm, das bei der Ausfuehrung (bei mir) auf zwei interne Fehler in GiNaC 1.1.3 verweist. Allerdings war, trotz neuester Versionen s?mtlicher Bibliotheken, schon die Kompilierung von GiNaC 1.1.3 nicht ganz erfolgreich Ein Test misslang: examining series expansion.........../run_exams: line 3: 12967 segment fault Ich hab's zu Probezwecken dennoch installiert. Alle technischen Details, Compilerversionen etc stehen in der C++ Datei. Mit vielen Gruessen, und Dank fuer euer tolles System!! Volkmar Klatt PS: Habe auf einem anderen Rechner auch die Intel Compiler Version 7.1 installiert, nur falls Testpersonen gesucht werden... -- NEU F?R ALLE - GMX MediaCenter - f?r Fotos, Musik, Dateien... Fotoalbum, File Sharing, MMS, Multimedia-Gru?, GMX FotoService Jetzt kostenlos anmelden unter http://www.gmx.net +++ GMX - die erste Adresse f?r Mail, Message, More! +++ -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: diff_gl_01_bugreport.cc URL: From kreckel at thep.physik.uni-mainz.de Mon Sep 29 23:28:16 2003 From: kreckel at thep.physik.uni-mainz.de (Richard B. Kreckel) Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 23:28:16 +0200 (CEST) Subject: installation problem and/or internal error of GiNaC 1.1.3 In-Reply-To: <9691.1064574141@www53.gmx.net> Message-ID: Hi, > examining series expansion.........../run_exams: line 3: 12967 segment fault Sorry, I cannot reproduce this. I believe it is a compiler bug. Which version do you have? gcc 3.3.1 (Debian prerelease) had some serious issues which could lead to exactly such faulty behavior. If that is your compiler, upgrade. As a general suggestion: dump your vendor's compiler. Roll your own one from the released tarballs. That procedure has always been the less troublesome. On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 anaximander at gmx.de wrote: > symbol x("x"); > ex f = cos( pow(x, 2) ) - x/3; // Funktion > > cout << "1. symbolische Ableitung" << endl; > ex fx = f.diff(x,1); > cout << fx << endl; > > // Nun: Versuch, den numerischen Wert an der Stelle 1 auszugeben: > // vgl. tutorial.ps S. 41 > cout << "1. Ableitung an der Stelle 1" << endl; > ex hilf1 = fx.subs( x == 1 ); > numeric fx_n = ex_to(hilf1);// numerischer Wert, vgl. tutorial.ps S. 38 Either use evalf() as on p. 38, upper half or check whether you really got a numeric object, as on p. 38, lower half. > /* the following command breaks the program and gives the output: > "Internal error: statement in file float/misc/cl_F_digits.cc, line 30 has been reached!! > Please send the authors of the program a description how you produced this error!" */ > cout << fx_n << endl; // comment out to see the second error > > /* the following command breaks the program and gives another output: > Internal error: statement in file real/elem/cl_R_mul.cc, line 93 has been reached!! > Please send the authors of the program a description how you produced this error! */ > cout << evalf(fx_n) << endl; Too late. Calling evalf on something that is already ill-defined. (Hint: sin(1) is an exact symbolic expression a pseudo function.) Regards -richy. -- Richard B. Kreckel