Fixed comment #27
Merged
Fixed comment #27
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Fixed comment in line 34: xf -> dx
Testing for f=f is missing from this code, which stands for NaN checking. Added f2003 IEEE Arithmetic that tests it explicitly.
|
What is the nan check for? and what are the consequences of this check in this location? It seems as if we wanted to check if |
Check if f is NaN at convergence Testing for f=f is missing from this code, which stands for NaN checking. Added f2003 IEEE Arithmetic that tests it explicitly.
This reverts commit b1729de.
|
At the time of writing, I was comparing with Netlib's code and just keeping the equivalence of the logical checks. Netlib's code uses NaN to empty Lagrange multipliers and boundaries, making NaN checks here and there as a sort of safety measure. Hence, I've reverted the NaN check. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixed comment in line 34: xf -> dx
I suppose it is a typo