Yeah, I still don't understand why that test failed/aborted, even so. But I've made the changes to the code. It's not a serious issue, since it is only the test code, so there's no need for SAGE to update FLINT in a hurry. I'll issue a patch some time over the next few days or so.
Thanks for doing the test. Bill. On 25 Dec, 02:02, David Harvey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Dec 24, 2007, at 7:40 PM, Bill Hart wrote: > > > > > I did find some occurrences of 63 instead of FLINT_BITS-1, but I don't > > believe this should be causing any problems with that function. > > > Since the function doesn't say fail, I can only imagine this is an out > > of memory problem. But I don't see any leaks, nor any requests for > > large blocks. > > > Can you tell me what happens when you run fmpz-test on its own on the > > G5. A global search and replace of 63 with FLINT_BITS-1 will fix the > > abovementioned. > > I changed the 63 to 31 in test_fmpz_set_si, and now it seems to work > (and subsequently fails on the test_fmpz_set_ui test, presumably for > the same reason). > > Kind of surprising that the test was passing on all those 32-bit > machines out there. > > Note that the G5 is a 64-bit machine, but in sage everything only > compiles in 32-bit mode. > > david --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://sage.scipy.org/sage/ and http://modular.math.washington.edu/sage/ -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
