**Next message:**Camm Maguire: "Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: FeynCalc -> MAXIMA"**Previous message:**David MENTRE: "On formal correctness and readability (was: Re: [Maxima] Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: FeynCalc -> MAXIMA)"**In reply to:**root: "Re: [Maxima] Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: FeynCalc -> MAXIMA"**Next in thread:**Bob McElrath: "Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: FeynCalc -> MAXIMA"**Messages sorted by:**[ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]**Mail actions:**[ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

Greetings! Just a thought here -- luckily all this is on top of lisp,

and, in principle, its 'code is data' feature would allow one to write

a walker which would generate a list of invocations guaranteed to

trigger every branch, or even specified levels of branch

combinations. Someone told me once they've seen such a walker for a

certain application, so the idea is not completely vaporware, but I'd

imagine the test list would grow exponentially quite quickly.

Just a thought.

Take care,

root <daly@idsi.net> writes:

*> Bob,
*

*>
*

*> > Test cases.
*

*> >
*

*> > While this does not *prove* the correctness of the code in a
*

*> > mathematical sense, it does in a monte-carlo sense. I note that both
*

*> > maxima and axiom have test suites.
*

*> >
*

*> > I do not think new mathematical code or subsystems should be accepted
*

*> > unless they are accompanied by a thorough test suite.
*

*>
*

*> I've been collecting test cases from different computer algebra systems.
*

*> The effort is called CATS (Computer Algebra Test Suite).
*

*>
*

*> One of the problems with current systems, like Axiom, is that people
*

*> write some algebra then write some test cases. The test cases are not
*

*> comprehensive, don't test corner cases, and don't test failure modes.
*

*> And, most egregious is, they are not documented. The tests given
*

*> an answer but is it the right answer? So current test cases are only
*

*> really useful as regression tests looking for what's broken.
*

*>
*

*> So the idea is to collect the various test suites, document the
*

*> underlying math and set up pamphlet files which contain code for
*

*> each of the various systems. You can get the Axiom code pile with
*

*> the CATS work using the tla from Gnu-arch.
*

*>
*

*> The idea is to develop a test suite that would be similar to the
*

*> NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) classification
*

*> scheme for numerical software but this time for symbolic software.
*

*> Currently there is no classification scheme and no agreed-upon
*

*> test suite.
*

*>
*

*> There are few enough computational mathematicians. We shouldn't waste
*

*> their time duplicating tests in areas that others have already done.
*

*> Besides, tests are best when written by others :-)
*

*>
*

*> Thus, CATS.
*

*>
*

*> Tim
*

*>
*

*>
*

*>
*

*>
*

-- Camm Maguire camm@enhanced.com ========================================================================== "The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens." -- Baha'u'llah

**Next message:**Camm Maguire: "Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: FeynCalc -> MAXIMA"**Previous message:**David MENTRE: "On formal correctness and readability (was: Re: [Maxima] Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: FeynCalc -> MAXIMA)"**In reply to:**root: "Re: [Maxima] Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: FeynCalc -> MAXIMA"**Next in thread:**Bob McElrath: "Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: FeynCalc -> MAXIMA"**Messages sorted by:**[ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]**Mail actions:**[ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29
: 10/22/17-09:00:01 PM Z CEST
*