[vtk-developers] DoublePi proposal

Andrew Maclean andrew.amaclean at gmail.com
Tue May 15 20:45:24 EDT 2012


Hi Marcus, I would be more than happy to update the parametric test code if
that is Ok with you.

Andrew


On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 9:55 AM, Marcus D. Hanwell <
marcus.hanwell at kitware.com> wrote:

> Andrew, Bill,
>
> We have been working on getting ParaView building against VTK modular,
> and fixing up issues as they cropped up. We have also spent some time
> fixing up the tests that are running and adding a few in. I also had
> other projects that had been neglected I have been getting back to.
>
> I plan on spending some time on restoring functionality/adding more
> tests Wednesday/Thursday. I would certainly welcome input (and
> patches) from those that know the code in these modules best. Failing
> that Chris and I will be working on restoring more tests now that
> ParaView is mostly ported over (master as of Friday is building
> against modular VTK 6).
>
> We would also like to work on getting the less reliable tests weeded
> out so that we can have a green dashboard. Ideally I would like to
> compile a list of people responsible/knowledgeable on the modules that
> have been established. We were thinking of adding this list to a wiki
> page, this would help both with code review and quality control.
>
> Just a few thoughts/input on what we have been up to.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Marcus
>
> On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 7:20 PM, Andrew Maclean
> <andrew.amaclean at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi Bill,
> > I had noticed this. I have been assuming that Marcus or someone has been
> > gradually reintroducing the tests.
> > If this is not the case is there something I should do?
> >
> > Andrew
> >
> >
> > On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 9:12 AM, Bill Lorensen <bill.lorensen at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Andrew,
> >>
> >> Looks to me like the Parametric classes are not being tested by VTK6
> >>
> >> Bill
> >>
> >> On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 6:47 PM, Andrew Maclean
> >> <andrew.amaclean at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > Hi Bill, David,
> >> >   As one of you pointed out earlier, the VTK Parametric classes will
> be
> >> > affected by this change. In particular, the regression tests will
> >> > fail due to the higher precision of Pi. I would only expect that the
> >> > pictures for the regression tests would need to be updated.
> >> >
> >> > When I wrote these in conjunction with Will, I must admit I was
> >> > frustrated
> >> > that vtkMath::Pi only returned float. However I made a decision to use
> >> > vtkMath::Pi rather than yet another constant for Pi in the hopes that
> >> > this
> >> > would change in the future. The greater precision should improve the
> >> > look of
> >> > some of the surfaces. E.g. the little imperfection at the pole of the
> >> > ellipsoid should get smaller.
> >> >
> >> > Let me know if I can help in any way.
> >> >
> >> > When things settle, I will also update the PDF titled "Parametric
> >> > Equations
> >> > for Surfaces" in the documentation to VTK 6.
> >> >
> >> > Regards
> >> >    Andrew
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> >> >> From: David Gobbi <david.gobbi at gmail.com>
> >> >> To: Bill Lorensen <bill.lorensen at gmail.com>
> >> >> Cc: VTK Developers <vtk-developers at vtk.org>
> >> >> Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 16:38:37 -0600
> >> >> Subject: Re: [vtk-developers] DoublePi proposal
> >> >> Bill, the main reason that I put my patch on hold was that I wanted
> to
> >> >> wait until VTK 6 had reached at least the same level of test coverage
> >> >> as VTK 5.  I still think that this is a valid reason for keeping this
> >> >> patch on hold.  The added pi precision will cause subtle changes in
> >> >> many regression images, and some of the changes will be significant
> >> >> enough to cause test failures.  That's great if all the regression
> >> >> tests are running, because we can examine any test failures that
> occur
> >> >> and replace the regression images as necessary.
> >> >>
> >> >> But right now in VTK 6, about half of our regression tests aren't
> >> >> running.  So if this Pi patch is pushed now, we won't see all the
> >> >> regression test failures immediately.  We'll see some regression test
> >> >> failures some weeks (or months?) later as the various tests are
> >> >> re-activated, and we won't be sure if the failures were caused by
> this
> >> >> patch, or if they were caused by some other patch.
> >> >>
> >> >>  - David
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 11:59 AM, David Gobbi <david.gobbi at gmail.com
> >
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> > http://review.source.kitware.com/#/t/427/
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Bill Lorensen
> >> >> > <bill.lorensen at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> David,
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Can you point me to the gerrit topic? If not, I can start from
> >> >> >> scratch.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Bill
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > ___________________________________________
> >> > Andrew J. P. Maclean
> >> >
> >> > ___________________________________________
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Unpaid intern in BillsBasement at noware dot com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > ___________________________________________
> > Andrew J. P. Maclean
> >
> > ___________________________________________
>



-- 
___________________________________________
Andrew J. P. Maclean

___________________________________________
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://public.kitware.com/pipermail/vtk-developers/attachments/20120516/07580140/attachment.html>


More information about the vtk-developers mailing list