OpenCores
URL https://opencores.org/ocsvn/eco32/eco32/trunk

Subversion Repositories eco32

[/] [eco32/] [trunk/] [lcc/] [sparc/] [solaris/] [tst/] [paranoia.1bk] - Blame information for rev 146

Go to most recent revision | Details | Compare with Previous | View Log

Line No. Rev Author Line
1 4 hellwig
Lest this program stop prematurely, i.e. before displaying
2
 
3
    `END OF TEST',
4
 
5
try to persuade the computer NOT to terminate execution when an
6
error like Over/Underflow or Division by Zero occurs, but rather
7
to persevere with a surrogate value after, perhaps, displaying some
8
warning.  If persuasion avails naught, don't despair but run this
9
program anyway to see how many milestones it passes, and then
10
amend it to make further progress.
11
 
12
Answer questions with Y, y, N or n (unless otherwise indicated).
13
 
14
 
15
Diagnosis resumes after milestone Number 0          Page: 1
16
 
17
Users are invited to help debug and augment this program so it will
18
cope with unanticipated and newly uncovered arithmetic pathologies.
19
 
20
Please send suggestions and interesting results to
21
        Richard Karpinski
22
        Computer Center U-76
23
        University of California
24
        San Francisco, CA 94143-0704, USA
25
 
26
In doing so, please include the following information:
27
        Precision:      double;
28
        Version:        10 February 1989;
29
        Computer:
30
 
31
        Compiler:
32
 
33
        Optimization level:
34
 
35
        Other relevant compiler options:
36
 
37
Diagnosis resumes after milestone Number 1          Page: 2
38
 
39
Running this program should reveal these characteristics:
40
     Radix = 1, 2, 4, 8, 10, 16, 100, 256 ...
41
     Precision = number of significant digits carried.
42
     U2 = Radix/Radix^Precision = One Ulp
43
        (OneUlpnit in the Last Place) of 1.000xxx .
44
     U1 = 1/Radix^Precision = One Ulp of numbers a little less than 1.0 .
45
     Adequacy of guard digits for Mult., Div. and Subt.
46
     Whether arithmetic is chopped, correctly rounded, or something else
47
        for Mult., Div., Add/Subt. and Sqrt.
48
     Whether a Sticky Bit used correctly for rounding.
49
     UnderflowThreshold = an underflow threshold.
50
     E0 and PseudoZero tell whether underflow is abrupt, gradual, or fuzzy.
51
     V = an overflow threshold, roughly.
52
     V0  tells, roughly, whether  Infinity  is represented.
53
     Comparisions are checked for consistency with subtraction
54
        and for contamination with pseudo-zeros.
55
     Sqrt is tested.  Y^X is not tested.
56
     Extra-precise subexpressions are revealed but NOT YET tested.
57
     Decimal-Binary conversion is NOT YET tested for accuracy.
58
 
59
Diagnosis resumes after milestone Number 2          Page: 3
60
 
61
The program attempts to discriminate among
62
   FLAWs, like lack of a sticky bit,
63
   Serious DEFECTs, like lack of a guard digit, and
64
   FAILUREs, like 2+2 == 5 .
65
Failures may confound subsequent diagnoses.
66
 
67
The diagnostic capabilities of this program go beyond an earlier
68
program called `MACHAR', which can be found at the end of the
69
book  `Software Manual for the Elementary Functions' (1980) by
70
W. J. Cody and W. Waite. Although both programs try to discover
71
the Radix, Precision and range (over/underflow thresholds)
72
of the arithmetic, this program tries to cope with a wider variety
73
of pathologies, and to say how well the arithmetic is implemented.
74
 
75
The program is based upon a conventional radix representation for
76
floating-point numbers, but also allows logarithmic encoding
77
as used by certain early WANG machines.
78
 
79
BASIC version of this program (C) 1983 by Prof. W. M. Kahan;
80
see source comments for more history.
81
 
82
Diagnosis resumes after milestone Number 3          Page: 4
83
 
84
Program is now RUNNING tests on small integers:
85
-1, 0, 1/2, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 9, 27, 32 & 240 are O.K.
86
 
87
Searching for Radix and Precision.
88
Radix = 2.000000 .
89
Closest relative separation found is U1 = 1.1102230e-16 .
90
 
91
Recalculating radix and precision
92
 confirms closest relative separation U1 .
93
Radix confirmed.
94
The number of significant digits of the Radix is 53.000000 .
95
 
96
Diagnosis resumes after milestone Number 30          Page: 5
97
 
98
Subtraction appears to be normalized, as it should be.
99
Checking for guard digit in *, /, and -.
100
     *, /, and - appear to have guard digits, as they should.
101
 
102
Diagnosis resumes after milestone Number 40          Page: 6
103
 
104
Checking rounding on multiply, divide and add/subtract.
105
Multiplication appears to round correctly.
106
Division appears to round correctly.
107
Addition/Subtraction appears to round correctly.
108
Checking for sticky bit.
109
Sticky bit apparently used correctly.
110
 
111
Does Multiplication commute?  Testing on 20 random pairs.
112
     No failures found in 20 integer pairs.
113
 
114
Running test of square root(x).
115
Testing if sqrt(X * X) == X for 20 Integers X.
116
Test for sqrt monotonicity.
117
sqrt has passed a test for Monotonicity.
118
Testing whether sqrt is rounded or chopped.
119
Square root appears to be correctly rounded.
120
 
121
Diagnosis resumes after milestone Number 90          Page: 7
122
 
123
Testing powers Z^i for small Integers Z and i.
124
... no discrepancis found.
125
 
126
Seeking Underflow thresholds UfThold and E0.
127
Smallest strictly positive number found is E0 = 4.94066e-324 .
128
Since comparison denies Z = 0, evaluating (Z + Z) / Z should be safe.
129
What the machine gets for (Z + Z) / Z is  2.00000000000000000e+00 .
130
This is O.K., provided Over/Underflow has NOT just been signaled.
131
Underflow is gradual; it incurs Absolute Error =
132
(roundoff in UfThold) < E0.
133
The Underflow threshold is 2.22507385850720188e-308,  below which
134
calculation may suffer larger Relative error than merely roundoff.
135
Since underflow occurs below the threshold
136
UfThold = (2.00000000000000000e+00) ^ (-1.02200000000000000e+03)
137
only underflow should afflict the expression
138
        (2.00000000000000000e+00) ^ (-1.02200000000000000e+03);
139
actually calculating yields: 0.00000000000000000e+00 .
140
This computed value is O.K.
141
 
142
Testing X^((X + 1) / (X - 1)) vs. exp(2) = 7.38905609893065218e+00 as X -> 1.
143
Accuracy seems adequate.
144
Testing powers Z^Q at four nearly extreme values.
145
 ... no discrepancies found.
146
 
147
 
148
Diagnosis resumes after milestone Number 160          Page: 8
149
 
150
Searching for Overflow threshold:
151
This may generate an error.
152
Can `Z = -Y' overflow?
153
Trying it on Y = -Infinity .
154
Seems O.K.
155
Overflow threshold is V  = 1.79769313486231571e+308 .
156
Overflow saturates at V0 = Infinity .
157
No Overflow should be signaled for V * 1 = 1.79769313486231571e+308
158
                           nor for V / 1 = 1.79769313486231571e+308 .
159
Any overflow signal separating this * from the one
160
above is a DEFECT.
161
 
162
 
163
Diagnosis resumes after milestone Number 190          Page: 9
164
 
165
 
166
What message and/or values does Division by Zero produce?
167
    Trying to compute 1 / 0 produces ...  Infinity .
168
 
169
    Trying to compute 0 / 0 produces ...  NaN .
170
 
171
Diagnosis resumes after milestone Number 220          Page: 10
172
 
173
 
174
 
175
No failures, defects nor flaws have been discovered.
176
Rounding appears to conform to the proposed IEEE standard P754.
177
The arithmetic diagnosed appears to be Excellent!
178
END OF TEST.

powered by: WebSVN 2.1.0

© copyright 1999-2024 OpenCores.org, equivalent to Oliscience, all rights reserved. OpenCores®, registered trademark.