TTPowerFunction::test fails

[nwolek]

commented out temporarily to implement build & test

[nwolek]

@lossius - Again, you are listed as the original author of this function. Can you look at the output to see what the issue might be here? There are 126 bad samples according to the test comparison. Similar to issue #184

[nwolek]

I would appreciate a second opinion, because I do not see an obvious pattern here in the bad samples:

TESTING power BAD SAMPLE @ n=1 ( value=0.0134391 expected=6.20001e-05 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=2 ( value=0.0266999 expected=0.000248 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=3 ( value=0.0397872 expected=0.000558001 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=4 ( value=0.0527055 expected=0.000992002 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=5 ( value=0.0654589 expected=0.00155 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=6 ( value=0.0780518 expected=0.002232 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=7 ( value=0.0904881 expected=0.00303801 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=8 ( value=0.102772 expected=0.00396801 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=9 ( value=0.114906 expected=0.00502201 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=10 ( value=0.126895 expected=0.00620001 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=11 ( value=0.138742 expected=0.00750202 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=12 ( value=0.15045 expected=0.00892802 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=13 ( value=0.162023 expected=0.010478 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=14 ( value=0.173463 expected=0.012152 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=15 ( value=0.184774 expected=0.01395 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=16 ( value=0.195959 expected=0.015872 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=17 ( value=0.207019 expected=0.017918 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=18 ( value=0.217959 expected=0.020088 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=19 ( value=0.22878 expected=0.022382 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=20 ( value=0.239486 expected=0.0248 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=21 ( value=0.250078 expected=0.0273421 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=22 ( value=0.260559 expected=0.0300081 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=23 ( value=0.270931 expected=0.0327981 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=24 ( value=0.281197 expected=0.0357121 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=25 ( value=0.291359 expected=0.0387501 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=26 ( value=0.301418 expected=0.0419121 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=27 ( value=0.311377 expected=0.0451981 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=28 ( value=0.321238 expected=0.0486081 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=29 ( value=0.331003 expected=0.0521421 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=30 ( value=0.340673 expected=0.0558001 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=31 ( value=0.350251 expected=0.0595821 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=32 ( value=0.359737 expected=0.0634881 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=33 ( value=0.369135 expected=0.0675181 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=34 ( value=0.378445 expected=0.0716721 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=35 ( value=0.387669 expected=0.0759502 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=36 ( value=0.396809 expected=0.0803522 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=37 ( value=0.405866 expected=0.0848782 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=38 ( value=0.414842 expected=0.0895282 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=39 ( value=0.423738 expected=0.0943022 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=40 ( value=0.432556 expected=0.0992002 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=41 ( value=0.441296 expected=0.104222 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=42 ( value=0.449961 expected=0.109368 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=43 ( value=0.458551 expected=0.114638 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=44 ( value=0.467068 expected=0.120032 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=45 ( value=0.475513 expected=0.12555 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=46 ( value=0.483888 expected=0.131192 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=47 ( value=0.492193 expected=0.136958 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=48 ( value=0.500429 expected=0.142848 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=49 ( value=0.508599 expected=0.148862 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=50 ( value=0.516702 expected=0.155 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=51 ( value=0.52474 expected=0.161262 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=52 ( value=0.532713 expected=0.167648 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=53 ( value=0.540624 expected=0.174158 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=54 ( value=0.548473 expected=0.180792 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=55 ( value=0.55626 expected=0.18755 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=56 ( value=0.563988 expected=0.194432 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=57 ( value=0.571656 expected=0.201438 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=58 ( value=0.579266 expected=0.208568 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=59 ( value=0.586818 expected=0.215822 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=60 ( value=0.594313 expected=0.2232 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=61 ( value=0.601753 expected=0.230702 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=62 ( value=0.609138 expected=0.238328 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=63 ( value=0.616469 expected=0.246078 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=64 ( value=0.623747 expected=0.253953 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=65 ( value=0.630972 expected=0.261951 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=66 ( value=0.638145 expected=0.270073 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=67 ( value=0.645267 expected=0.278319 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=68 ( value=0.652338 expected=0.286689 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=69 ( value=0.65936 expected=0.295183 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=70 ( value=0.666333 expected=0.303801 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=71 ( value=0.673258 expected=0.312543 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=72 ( value=0.680135 expected=0.321409 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=73 ( value=0.686965 expected=0.330399 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=74 ( value=0.693749 expected=0.339513 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=75 ( value=0.700487 expected=0.348751 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=76 ( value=0.70718 expected=0.358113 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=77 ( value=0.713828 expected=0.367599 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=78 ( value=0.720433 expected=0.377209 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=79 ( value=0.726994 expected=0.386943 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=80 ( value=0.733513 expected=0.396801 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=81 ( value=0.739989 expected=0.406783 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=82 ( value=0.746423 expected=0.416889 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=83 ( value=0.752817 expected=0.427119 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=84 ( value=0.75917 expected=0.437473 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=85 ( value=0.765482 expected=0.447951 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=86 ( value=0.771755 expected=0.458553 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=87 ( value=0.777989 expected=0.469279 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=88 ( value=0.784185 expected=0.480129 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=89 ( value=0.790342 expected=0.491103 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=90 ( value=0.796462 expected=0.502201 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=91 ( value=0.802544 expected=0.513423 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=92 ( value=0.80859 expected=0.524769 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=93 ( value=0.814599 expected=0.536239 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=94 ( value=0.820572 expected=0.547833 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=95 ( value=0.82651 expected=0.559551 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=96 ( value=0.832413 expected=0.571393 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=97 ( value=0.838281 expected=0.583359 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=98 ( value=0.844115 expected=0.595449 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=99 ( value=0.849915 expected=0.607663 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=100 ( value=0.855682 expected=0.620001 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=101 ( value=0.861415 expected=0.632463 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=102 ( value=0.867116 expected=0.645049 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=103 ( value=0.872785 expected=0.657759 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=104 ( value=0.878421 expected=0.670593 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=105 ( value=0.884026 expected=0.683551 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=106 ( value=0.8896 expected=0.696633 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=107 ( value=0.895143 expected=0.709839 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=108 ( value=0.900656 expected=0.723169 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=109 ( value=0.906138 expected=0.736623 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=110 ( value=0.91159 expected=0.750202 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=111 ( value=0.917013 expected=0.763904 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=112 ( value=0.922406 expected=0.77773 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=113 ( value=0.927771 expected=0.79168 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=114 ( value=0.933106 expected=0.805754 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=115 ( value=0.938414 expected=0.819952 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=116 ( value=0.943694 expected=0.834274 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=117 ( value=0.948945 expected=0.84872 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=118 ( value=0.95417 expected=0.86329 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=119 ( value=0.959367 expected=0.877984 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=120 ( value=0.964537 expected=0.892802 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=121 ( value=0.969681 expected=0.907744 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=122 ( value=0.974798 expected=0.92281 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=123 ( value=0.97989 expected=0.938 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=124 ( value=0.984955 expected=0.953314 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=125 ( value=0.989995 expected=0.968752 ) BAD SAMPLE @ n=126 ( value=0.99501 expected=0.984314 ) badSampleCount is 126

[tap]

This test isn't failing for me right now, FWIW.

According to this: https://github.com/jamoma/JamomaCore/blob/master/Foundation/library/source/TTUnitTest.cpp#L155

The actual logging is disabled.

[lossius]

On the dev branch the failing test is commented out.

Why did we disable the logging, I kind of miss it...

[lossius]

This is fixed on the dev branch now.