[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Bug in expm
From: |
Jaroslav Hajek |
Subject: |
Re: Bug in expm |
Date: |
Sat, 26 Apr 2008 21:31:40 +0200 |
On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 8:43 AM, Marco Caliari <address@hidden> wrote:
> On Sat, 26 Apr 2008, Jaroslav Hajek wrote:
>
>
> > Attached is the changeset. I didn't test, though (I forgot yesterday
> > and it takes almost 2 hours to compile Octave on this machine).
> >
>
> Dear Jaroslav,
>
> either there is a significant difference between 3.0.1 and current sources
> or I do not understand the patch (or both). Anyway, I attached the relevant
> parts, as they should be.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Marco
there seem to be some extra lines in the default branch, as compared
to the release-3-0-x version. Attached is what seems to me to be the
equivalent code snippet in default branch's dMatrix.cc (judging by the
leading and trailing comment). It seems I did the patch right, based
on your comments. If not, please clarify. Should release-3-0-x also be
patched?
--
RNDr. Jaroslav Hajek
computing expert
Aeronautical Research and Test Institute (VZLU)
Prague, Czech Republic
url: www.highegg.matfyz.cz
dMatrix_snippet.cc
Description: Binary data
- Bug in expm, Marco Caliari, 2008/04/22
- Bug in expm, John W. Eaton, 2008/04/22
- Re: Bug in expm, Marco Caliari, 2008/04/23
- Re: Bug in expm, Jaroslav Hajek, 2008/04/24
- Re: Bug in expm, Marco Caliari, 2008/04/24
- Re: Bug in expm, Jaroslav Hajek, 2008/04/24
- Re: Bug in expm, Jaroslav Hajek, 2008/04/26
- Re: Bug in expm, Marco Caliari, 2008/04/26
- Re: Bug in expm,
Jaroslav Hajek <=
- Re: Bug in expm, Marco Caliari, 2008/04/27
- Re: Bug in expm, John W. Eaton, 2008/04/29