3. Hardware bugs? Rare but possible. On 14 May 2016 at 08:01, Gilles <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org> wrote:
> On Sat, 14 May 2016 02:47:18 +0200, Gilles wrote: > >> Hello. >> >> Test method "testNaNsFixedTiesRandom" (in the above unit test class) >> can pass or fail depending on the seed value. >> >> When seed is 1000, the test passes. >> >> When seed is 1001, this failure occurs: >> Elements at index 1 differ. expected = 3.0 observed = 4.0 >> Elements at index 4 differ. expected = 3.0 observed = 2.0 >> >> When seed is 1002, this failure occurs: >> Elements at index 1 differ. expected = 3.0 observed = 2.0 >> Elements at index 4 differ. expected = 3.0 observed = 4.0 >> Elements at index 8 differ. expected = 2.0 observed = 3.0 >> >> When seed is 1003, this failure occurs: >> Elements at index 8 differ. expected = 2.0 observed = 4.0 >> >> When seed is 1004, this failure occurs: >> Elements at index 1 differ. expected = 3.0 observed = 2.0 >> >> When seed is 1005, this failure occurs: >> Elements at index 4 differ. expected = 3.0 observed = 2.0 >> Elements at index 8 differ. expected = 2.0 observed = 3.0 >> >> When seed is 1006, this failure occurs: >> Elements at index 1 differ. expected = 3.0 observed = 4.0 >> Elements at index 4 differ. expected = 3.0 observed = 4.0 >> Elements at index 8 differ. expected = 2.0 observed = 3.0 >> >> When seed is 1007, this failure occurs: >> Elements at index 1 differ. expected = 3.0 observed = 2.0 >> Elements at index 4 differ. expected = 3.0 observed = 4.0 >> >> When seed is 1008, this failure occurs: >> Elements at index 1 differ. expected = 3.0 observed = 2.0 >> Elements at index 8 differ. expected = 2.0 observed = 4.0 >> >> When seed is 1009, this failure occurs: >> Elements at index 1 differ. expected = 3.0 observed = 2.0 >> >> When seed is 1010, this failure occurs: >> Elements at index 1 differ. expected = 3.0 observed = 4.0 >> Elements at index 4 differ. expected = 3.0 observed = 2.0 >> Elements at index 8 differ. expected = 2.0 observed = 3.0 >> >> Also fails when seed is >> 1011 >> 1012 >> 1013 >> 1014 >> 1015 >> 1016 >> 1017 >> 112351341 >> -932524 >> >> Is that expected behaviour? >> It does not look trivial to understand why one should trust a >> test that fails most of the time... >> > > The test fails for ~96.3% of the possible seed values. > > Cause for such a behaviour can be: > 1. unit test is buggy > 2. code being tested is buggy > > Are there other possible causes? > > > > Regards, > Gilles > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > -- Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com>
