Tests for multiply (R←X×Y) #76
+157
−2
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,154 @@ | ||
| :Namespace multiply | ||
| Assert←#.unittest.Assert | ||
| stripToSameLen←#.utils.stripToSameLen | ||
| isDyalogClassic←#.utils.isClassic | ||
|
|
||
| complexMultiplyModel←{ | ||
| (⎕FR≡1287) ∧ case≡'Hcmplx': ⍺×⍵ ⍝ Skipping cmplx for ⎕FR←1287 | ||
| a c b d←∊(9 11○⊂)⍺ ⍵ | ||
| ⍝ using formula (a+bi)(c+di)=(ac−bd)+(ad+bc)i | ||
| x←((a model c)-(b model d)) | ||
| y←((a model d)+(b model c)) | ||
| x(⊣+¯11○⊢)y | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| ⍝ model for multiply might not be completely accurate for floats | ||
| ⍝ because it uses reciprocal and divide and there might be a | ||
| ⍝ loss of precision | ||
| model←{⍺{ | ||
| 0≡⍵:0 | ||
| ⍝ is ⍵ or ⍺ complex | ||
| (1289≡⎕DR ⍵) ∨ (1289≡⎕DR ⍺): ⍺ complexMultiplyModel¨ ⍵ | ||
| ⍺⌹¨÷⍵ | ||
sloorush marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
| }¨⍵} | ||
|
|
||
| ∇ {r}←test_multiply;fr_dbl;fr_decf;RunVariations;bool;i1;i2;i3;char0;char1;char2;char3;charptr;dbl;cmplx;Hcmplx;Hdbl;Sdbl;fl;Hfl;testDesc;case;case2;fr;desc;data;d1;d2;data2;case3;data3;c1;c2;f | ||
| RunVariations←(model #.testfns._RunVariations_ ×) | ||
|
|
||
| ⍝ constants | ||
| fr_dbl←#.utils.fr_dbl | ||
| fr_decf←#.utils.fr_decf | ||
|
|
||
| ⍝ All data generated is unique | ||
| bool←0 1 ⍝ 11: 1 bit Boolean type arrays | ||
| i1←{⍵,-⍵}⍳120 ⍝ 83: 8 bits signed integer | ||
| i2←{⍵,-⍵}10000+⍳100 ⍝ 163: 16 bits signed integer | ||
sloorush marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
| i3←{⍵,-⍵}100000+⍳100 ⍝ 323: 32 bits signed integer | ||
| char0←⎕AV ⍝ 82: DyalogAPL classic char set | ||
| :If ~isDyalogClassic | ||
| char1←⎕UCS (100+⍳100) ⍝ 80: 8 bits character | ||
| char2←⎕UCS (1000+⍳100) ⍝ 160: 16 bits character | ||
| char3←⎕UCS (100000+⍳100) ⍝ 320: 32 bits character | ||
| :EndIf | ||
| charptr←(13↑⎕a) (13↓⎕a) ⍝ 326: Pointer (32-bit or 64-bit as appropriate) | ||
| dbl←{⍵,-⍵}i3+0.1 ⍝ 645: 64 bits Floating | ||
| cmplx←{⍵,-⍵}(0J1×⍳100)+⌽⍳100 ⍝ 1289: 128 bits Complex | ||
| Hcmplx←{⍵,-⍵}(1E14J1E14×⍳20) ⍝ 1289 but larger numbers to test for CT value | ||
| ⍝ Hdbl is 645 but larger numbers to test for CT value | ||
| ⍝ intervals of 2 are chosen because CT for these numbers +1 and -1 | ||
| ⍝ come under the region of tolerant equality | ||
| Hdbl←{⍵,-⍵}1E14+(2×⍳50) ⍝ 645: large numbers | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Again, I would be testing more "interesting" values too. For mantis 21743 the test was using 9007199254740992, which was the largest float that can be expressed as an integer. Perhaps also use inputs that you know will produce (close to) the largest resulting float answer (~1e154)? There was a problem hiding this comment. The more bigger values are supposed to be tested by the random number generator in There was a problem hiding this comment. Is there a way I can easily find these 'interesting values' in mantis? For now, are there any specific values you would want to include other than this? |
||
| Sdbl←{⍵,-⍵}(⍳500)÷1000 ⍝ 645: Small numbers | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Again, in general, testing more small numbers would be good. Including denormal values (e.g. 1e¯310). Not that it should cause any issues here, but still. |
||
|
|
||
| ⍝ Hfl is 1287 but larger numbers to test for CT value | ||
| ⍝ far intervals are chosen for non overlap | ||
| ⍝ with region of tolerant equality | ||
| ⎕FR←fr_decf | ||
| fl←{⍵,-⍵}i3+0.01 ⍝ 1287: 128 bits Decimal | ||
| Hfl←{⍵,-⍵}2E29+(1E16×⍳10) | ||
| ⎕FR←fr_dbl | ||
|
|
||
| r←⍬ | ||
| testDesc←{'for ',case,{0∊⍴case2:'',⍵⋄' , ', case2,⍵}, '& ⎕FR:', ⎕FR} | ||
|
|
||
| r case case2←⍬ ⍬ ⍬ | ||
|
|
||
| :For fr :In 2 1 | ||
| ⎕FR←fr⊃fr_dbl fr_decf | ||
|
|
||
| quadparams←⎕CT ⎕DCT ⎕FR ⎕IO ⎕DIV | ||
| case←'independant' | ||
| desc←testDesc⍬ | ||
|
|
||
| r,←'TI1' desc Assert 0≡0×0 | ||
| r,←'TNull1' desc Assert ⍬≡''×0 ⍝ testing for null values | ||
| r,←'TNull2' desc Assert ⍬≡⍬×0 | ||
| r,←'TNull3' desc Assert ⍬≡0×'' | ||
| r,←'TNull4' desc Assert ⍬≡0×⍬ | ||
|
|
||
| :For case :In 'bool' 'i1' 'i2' 'i3' 'dbl' 'fl' 'cmplx' 'Hdbl' 'Sdbl' 'Hfl' 'Hcmplx' | ||
| data←⍎case | ||
| desc←testDesc⍬ | ||
|
|
||
| ⍝ General tests to test the basic rules of multiply | ||
| r,← 'TGen1' desc Assert (≢data)≡≢data×data | ||
|
|
||
| d1←(data~0)[?≢data~0] | ||
|
|
||
| r,← 'T1' desc quadparams RunVariations (data model data) data data ⍝ model test | ||
| d1←data[?≢data] | ||
| d2←data[?≢(data~d1)] | ||
| r,← 'T2' desc quadparams RunVariations data data 1 ⍝ Identity | ||
| r,← 'T3' desc quadparams RunVariations (0⍨¨data) data 0 ⍝ x×0=0 | ||
| r,← 'T4' desc Assert 0≡0×d1 | ||
| r,← 'T5' desc Assert 0≡d1×0 | ||
| r,← 'T6' desc Assert d1≡1×d1 | ||
| r,← 'T7' desc Assert d1≡d1×1 | ||
| r,← 'T8' desc Assert (d1×d2)≡d2×d1 ⍝ commutability | ||
| :EndFor | ||
|
|
||
| ⍝ Cross type tests | ||
| :For case2 :In 'i1' 'i2' 'i3' 'dbl' 'fl' 'cmplx' 'Hdbl' 'Hfl' 'Hcmplx' | ||
| data2←⍎case2 | ||
| data data2←data stripToSameLen data2 | ||
| desc←testDesc⍬ | ||
| :If (case≡case2) | ||
| :Continue | ||
| :EndIf | ||
|
|
||
| r,← 'TCross1' desc quadparams RunVariations (data model data2) data data2 ⍝ check result of different datatypes using model | ||
| r,← 'TCross2' desc quadparams RunVariations (data2 model data) data2 data ⍝ TCross1 but reversed | ||
| r,← 'TCross3' desc quadparams RunVariations ((data2,data) model (data,data2)) (data2,data) (data,data2) ⍝ concat 2 different types | ||
| r,← 'TCross4' desc Assert (((data2 data) model (data data2))≡(data2 data)×(data data2)) ⍝ merge two different arrays creating a pointer array | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| :EndFor | ||
|
|
||
| ⍝ tests for known errors | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Multiply is a trivial primitive, but I'd still like to see tests for more places where we expect failure. E.g., ×⍨1e155. We don't want this to generate a 1287 accidentally, for example (even though that's improbable, we should still treat the interpreter as a black box and create that test). There was a problem hiding this comment. Want to confirm:
Should I test if this gives a domain error or not? |
||
| :For case3 :In 'char1' 'char2' 'char3' 'char0' 'charptr' | ||
| :If (isDyalogClassic) ∧ (case≢'char0') ∧ (case≢'ptr') | ||
| :Continue ⍝ Skip tests for unicode character sets in DyalogAPL classic | ||
| :EndIf | ||
| data3←⍎case3 | ||
| desc←testDesc⍬ | ||
| c1←data3[?≢data3] | ||
| c2←(data3~c1)[?¯1+≢data3] | ||
|
|
||
| f←0 ⍝ flag | ||
| :Trap 11 ⍝ 11: Domain error | ||
| c1×c2 ⍝ N/A type × N/A type | ||
| :Else | ||
| f←1 | ||
| r,← 'TDomainE2' desc Assert (f ∧ ⎕dmx.Message≡'') ⍝ check for error and dmx message | ||
| :EndTrap | ||
|
|
||
| f←0 ⍝ flag | ||
| :Trap 11 ⍝ 11: Domain error | ||
| d1×c2 ⍝ Number type × N/A type | ||
| :Else | ||
| f←1 | ||
| r,← 'TDomainE3' desc Assert (f ∧ ⎕dmx.Message≡'') ⍝ check for error and dmx message | ||
| :EndTrap | ||
|
|
||
| f←0 ⍝ flag | ||
| :Trap 11 ⍝ 11: Domain error | ||
| c1×d1 ⍝ N/A type × number type | ||
| :Else | ||
| f←1 | ||
| r,← 'TDomainE4' desc Assert (f ∧ ⎕dmx.Message≡'') ⍝ check for error and dmx message | ||
| :EndTrap | ||
| :EndFor | ||
| :EndFor | ||
| ∇ | ||
| :EndNamespace | ||
|
|
||
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Could you use {*(⍟⍺)+⍟⍵} as the model (using logarithms instead)? This would remove the need to handle complex numbers specifically.
Or, alternatively, could you use multiple models for redundancy?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There is a minor problem with the model that it gives complex answers from negative numbers. I changed the model to:
(it is a makeshift approach, i know the × should not be there to multiply the sign)
The problem with this now is the direction operator approach will not give me the sign of the for the complex numbers but the direction of the complex vector(i think). Is there a solution to this?