[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: 970415: Maybe I spoke too soon about that alpha stuff

This archive contains answers to questions sent to Unidata support through mid-2025. Note that the archive is no longer being updated. We provide the archive for reference; many of the answers presented here remain technically correct, even if somewhat outdated. For the most up-to-date information on the use of NSF Unidata software and data services, please consult the Software Documentation first.

  • Subject: Re: 970415: Maybe I spoke too soon about that alpha stuff
  • Date: Tue, 15 Apr 1997 11:12:24 -0600
> >To: address@hidden
> >From: Dan Schmitt <address@hidden>
> >Subject: Maybe I spoke too soon about that alpha stuff
> >Organization: .
> >Keywords: 199704151618.KAA21436
>
> The t_nc test program in libsrc on the 3.3a release
> produces:
>
> ...

The output you sent is the normal output for t_nc.
In eariler releases, this was made clear. The 'make test'
target would compare the output with file we sent along.
We just haven't refined the Makefile to that point yet in
netcdf-3. The tests nc_test and nctest are much more stringent.
t_nc is just a blunder test.

FYI, the line

> fill_seq indices         1 2 3  75.000000 != 2.718282

is just a check of the put1 method. We put an array out, and
then overwrite on value, and the output tells us it worked
and is in the right place.

If there was really a problem in t_nc, it would fail an assertion
and stop.

-glenn