Services & Resources / Wolfram Forums
-----
 /
MathGroup Archive
2000
*January
*February
*March
*April
*May
*June
*July
*August
*September
*October
*November
*December
*Archive Index
*Ask about this page
*Print this page
*Give us feedback
*Sign up for the Wolfram Insider

MathGroup Archive 2000

[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]

Search the Archive

Re: buggy part allocation ?

  • To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
  • Subject: [mg23463] Re: buggy part allocation ?
  • From: Jens-Peer Kuska <kuska at informatik.uni-leipzig.de>
  • Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 00:54:13 -0400 (EDT)
  • Organization: Universitaet Leipzig
  • References: <8fb1p5$hqm@smc.vnet.net>
  • Sender: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com

Hi Chris,

I can't explain and I can't reproduce it 
with Mathematica 4.0.2 and IRIX and Matheamtica 4.0.2 and NT (SP4)

Regards
  Jens
Chris Slinger wrote:
> 
> I'm having problems with silly results.  The cause seems to be faulty
> parts allocation.  This is illustrated below.  I've mailed wolfram
> support but have yet to receive a reply.  I'm running v4.0.1 for X on
> Sun Solaris.  I know that there has been trouble with Range[] in the
> past, but thought that this had been fixed.
> 
> Can anyone explain the following behaviour ?
> 
> In[1]:=$Version
> Out[1]="4.0 for Solaris (July 21, 1999)"
> 
> In[2]:=$CreationDate
> Out[2]={1999, 7, 21, 1, 43, 0}
> 
> In[3]:= m = 256; list = Table[0, {m}, {m}];
> insert = Table[Random[Complex, {-1 - I, +1 + I}], {10}, {250}];
> 
> In[4]:= list[[Range[10], Range[250]]] = 1*insert; MatrixQ[list]
> Out[4]=True
> 
> In[5]:=list[[Range[10], Range[250]]] = 2*insert; MatrixQ[list]
> Out[5]=False
> 
> In[6]:= thing = 2*insert; list[[Range[10], Range[250]]] = thing; MatrixQ[list]
> Out[6]=False
> 
> __________________________
> 
> Out[5] and Out[6] should, I imagine, be "True" - simply changing from
> 1*insert to 2*insert breaks the parts allocation.
> 
> The above behaviour is also exhibited on NT systems.  What is happening
> here ?  Am I doing something daft ?!
> 
> Please copy any correspondence on this to my e-mail, as I often
> miss the newsgroup postings....
> 
> Thanks,
> -chris
> slinger at signal.dera.gov.uk
> 
> PS - this has echoes of the complex packed array bug (now supposed to
> be fixed).  If "insert" is Real, there are no problems in the above...


  • Prev by Date: Re: Problem with partial differential equations
  • Next by Date: Re: Difficult integral
  • Previous by thread: buggy part allocation ?
  • Next by thread: evaluation sequence