[Help-gsl] gsl libraries by Brian Gladman

[Brian Gladman]

After quite a bit of effort I have managed to download the repository 
version of GSL.

There is now only one out of order declaration in the repository code as 
follows:

ode-initval2\test.c (2185 ...) out of order declarations:
------------------------------------ 
 /* Test driver_apply_fixed_step */

 gsl_odeiv2_driver_reset_hstart (d, 1e-3);
 const unsigned long int nfsteps = 100000;
 const double hfixed = 0.000025;
 s = gsl_odeiv2_driver_apply_fixed_step (d, &t, hfixed, nfsteps, y);

 if (s != GSL_SUCCESS)
------------------------------------ 

Other than this, the x64 static library and x64 DLL versions of GSL build 
using Visual Studio 2012 without any problems.

There are, however, quite a few test errors as follows:

FAIL: test gsl_cdf_negative_binomial_P (k=1) (0.007975603534247519 observed 
vs 1.7826072715365244e+042 expected) [292]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_negative_binomial_P (k=2) (0.021828007672695257 observed 
vs 1.1153299941303276e+087 expected) [293]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_negative_binomial_P (k=3) (0.045423269388517616 observed 
vs 5.3906624868748572e+131 expected) [294]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_negative_binomial_P (k=4) (0.079695387030749965 observed 
vs 2.2217612932918051e+176 expected) [295]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_negative_binomial_P (k=5) (0.12431768420093631 observed 
vs 8.2081917759527404e+220 expected) [296]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_negative_binomial_P (k=6) (0.17793881130044437 observed 
vs 2.7987919956058593e+265 expected) [297]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_negative_binomial_P (k=7) (0.23853068492288562 observed 
vs 1.#INF expected) [298]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_negative_binomial_P (k=8) (0.3037426889090421 observed vs 
1.#INF expected) [299]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_negative_binomial_P (k=9) (0.37120088414360553 observed 
vs 1.#INF expected) [300]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_negative_binomial_P (k=10) (0.43872653757340946 observed 
vs 1.#INF expected) [301]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_negative_binomial_P (k=11) (0.50447196923096826 observed 
vs 1.#INF expected) [302]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_negative_binomial_P (k=12) (0.56698491716536814 observed 
vs 1.#INF expected) [303]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_negative_binomial_P (k=13) (0.62521813251041114 observed 
vs 1.#INF expected) [304]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_negative_binomial_P (k=14) (0.678501524551123 observed vs 
1.#INF expected) [305]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_negative_binomial_P (k=15) (0.72649209964912442 observed 
vs 1.#INF expected) [306]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_negative_binomial_Q (k=14) (0.321498475448877 observed vs 
1.#INF expected) [308]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_negative_binomial_Q (k=13) (0.37478186748958892 observed 
vs 1.#INF expected) [309]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_negative_binomial_Q (k=12) (0.43301508283463186 observed 
vs 1.#INF expected) [310]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_negative_binomial_Q (k=11) (0.49552803076903174 observed 
vs 1.#INF expected) [311]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_negative_binomial_Q (k=10) (0.56127346242659049 observed 
vs 1.#INF expected) [312]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_negative_binomial_Q (k=9) (0.62879911585639447 observed 
vs 1.#INF expected) [313]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_negative_binomial_Q (k=8) (0.6962573110909579 observed vs 
1.#INF expected) [314]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_negative_binomial_Q (k=7) (0.76146931507711435 observed 
vs 1.#INF expected) [315]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_negative_binomial_Q (k=6) (0.82206118869955569 observed 
vs 1.#INF expected) [316]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_negative_binomial_Q (k=5) (0.87568231579906364 observed 
vs 1.#INF expected) [317]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_negative_binomial_Q (k=4) (0.92030461296925004 observed 
vs 1.#INF expected) [318]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_negative_binomial_Q (k=3) (0.9545767306114824 observed vs 
1.#INF expected) [319]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_negative_binomial_Q (k=2) (0.97817199232730478 observed 
vs 1.#INF expected) [320]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_negative_binomial_Q (k=1) (0.99202439646575247 observed 
vs 1.#INF expected) [321]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_negative_binomial_Q (k=0) (0.99830666591629569 observed 
vs 1.#INF expected) [322]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_pascal_P (k=1) (0.010935000000000011 observed vs 
2.4133117759072409e+042 expected) [372]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_pascal_P (k=2) (0.028795500000000075 observed vs 
1.4380428957364368e+087 expected) [373]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_pascal_P (k=3) (0.057967650000000023 observed vs 
6.6647794188707294e+131 expected) [374]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_pascal_P (k=4) (0.098808660000000659 observed vs 
2.647603400063381e+176 expected) [375]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_pascal_P (k=5) (0.15026833259999955 observed vs 
9.4659147604519624e+220 expected) [376]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_pascal_P (k=6) (0.21030461729999975 observed vs 
3.1336356050936581e+265 expected) [377]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_pascal_P (k=7) (0.27634453046999818 observed vs 1.#INF 
expected) [378]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_pascal_P (k=8) (0.3456864392984999 observed vs 1.#INF 
expected) [379]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_pascal_P (k=9) (0.4157988137806462 observed vs 1.#INF 
expected) [380]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_pascal_P (k=10) (0.48450894077315709 observed vs 1.#INF 
expected) [381]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_pascal_P (k=11) (0.55009588017509892 observed vs 1.#INF 
expected) [382]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_pascal_P (k=12) (0.61131035695023694 observed vs 1.#INF 
expected) [383]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_pascal_P (k=13) (0.66734514722901883 observed vs 1.#INF 
expected) [384]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_pascal_P (k=14) (0.71777645847992777 observed vs 1.#INF 
expected) [385]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_pascal_P (k=15) (0.76249222112239812 observed vs 1.#INF 
expected) [386]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_pascal_Q (k=14) (0.28222354152007229 observed vs 1.#INF 
expected) [388]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_pascal_Q (k=13) (0.33265485277098117 observed vs 1.#INF 
expected) [389]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_pascal_Q (k=12) (0.38868964304976306 observed vs 1.#INF 
expected) [390]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_pascal_Q (k=11) (0.44990411982490108 observed vs 1.#INF 
expected) [391]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_pascal_Q (k=10) (0.51549105922684291 observed vs 1.#INF 
expected) [392]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_pascal_Q (k=9) (0.5842011862193538 observed vs 1.#INF 
expected) [393]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_pascal_Q (k=8) (0.65431356070150004 observed vs 1.#INF 
expected) [394]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_pascal_Q (k=7) (0.72365546953000182 observed vs 1.#INF 
expected) [395]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_pascal_Q (k=6) (0.78969538270000028 observed vs 1.#INF 
expected) [396]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_pascal_Q (k=5) (0.84973166740000039 observed vs 1.#INF 
expected) [397]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_pascal_Q (k=4) (0.90119133999999934 observed vs 1.#INF 
expected) [398]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_pascal_Q (k=3) (0.94203234999999996 observed vs 1.#INF 
expected) [399]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_pascal_Q (k=2) (0.97120449999999992 observed vs 1.#INF 
expected) [400]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_pascal_Q (k=1) (0.98906499999999997 observed vs 1.#INF 
expected) [401]
FAIL: test gsl_cdf_pascal_Q (k=0) (0.99756999999999996 observed vs 1.#INF 
expected) [402]

FAIL: test gsl_ran_negative_binomial i=1 (0 observed vs 1.38514e+035 
expected) [133]
FAIL: test gsl_ran_negative_binomial i=2 (0 observed vs 2.88881e+080 
expected) [134]
FAIL: test gsl_ran_negative_binomial i=3 (0 observed vs 4.20782e+125 
expected) [135]
FAIL: test gsl_ran_negative_binomial i=4 (0 observed vs 4.80576e+170 
expected) [136]
FAIL: test gsl_ran_negative_binomial i=5 (0 observed vs 4.58185e+215 
expected) [137]
FAIL: test gsl_ran_negative_binomial i=6 (1e-005 observed vs 3.79198e+260 
expected) [138]
FAIL: test gsl_ran_pascal i=1 (0.30694 observed vs 1.1688e+067 expected) 
[139]
FAIL: test gsl_ran_pascal i=2 (0.12267 observed vs 1.77878e+134 expected) 
[140]
FAIL: test gsl_ran_pascal i=3 (0.041 observed vs 2.2559e+201 expected) [141]
FAIL: test gsl_ran_pascal i=4 (0.01278 observed vs 2.57491e+268 expected) 
[142]

FAIL: gsl_sf_hyperg_2F1_e(3.5, -0.5, 5.0, 0.9, &r) [2104]
 expected: 5.9239812843706530e-001
 obtained: 4.5788485734926559e-001 +/- 1.1491551919116466e-014 
(rel=2.5097e-014)
 fracdiff: 1.2807336014025938e-001
tolerance: 5.6843418860808015e-014
 value/expected not consistent within reported error
 value not within tolerance of expected value
 4.578848573492655900e-001  1.149155191911646600e-014
FAIL: gsl_sf_hyperg_2F1_e(-1.0, -10.0, 1.0, 0.5, &r) [2105]
 expected: 6.0000000000000000e+000
 obtained: 0.0000000000000000e+000 +/- 0.0000000000000000e+000 
(rel=-1.#IND)
 fracdiff: 1.0000000000000000e+000
tolerance: 4.4408920985006262e-016
 value/expected not consistent within reported error
 value not within tolerance of expected value
 unexpected return code: 24
 0.000000000000000000e+000  0.000000000000000000e+000
FAIL: Hypergeometric Functions [2134]

gsl: ..\..\cdf\gammainv.c:111: ERROR: inverse failed to converge
gsl: ..\..\poly\zsolve.c:78: ERROR: root solving qr method failed to 
converge

I would be most grateful to know which of these are 'work in progress' and 
which are unexpected and might hence be specific to a Visual Studio GSL 
build.

   with my best regards,

         Brian Gladman