Re: [cctbxbb] Boost Python 1.56

Hi Marcin, Thanks! I forgot the recursive flag for diff. I thought it was odd that there weren't that many differences between the 2 source trees. We can update the tests when we make the move to 1.56. Also, I'm assuming that we want to just use the standard 1.56 tarball. -- Billy K. Poon Research Scientist, Molecular Biophysics and Integrated Bioimaging Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory 1 Cyclotron Road, M/S 33R0345 Berkeley, CA 94720 Tel: (510) 486-5709 Fax: (510) 486-5909 Web: https://phenix-online.org On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:49 PM, Marcin Wojdyr wrote:

On 5 April 2017 at 23:37, Billy Poon wrote:

...

It looks like the errors are related to random number generation. For a given seed, would the sequence of numbers change when Boost is changed? I did a diff between Boost 1.56 and the current Boost and could not see any changes that immediately stood out as being related to random numbers.

Are these tests failing for others as well?

Hi Billy, perhaps it's this change in boost/random/normal_distribution.hpp: https://github.com/boostorg/random/commit/f0ec97ba36c05ef00f2d29dcf66094 e3f4abdcde _______________________________________________ cctbxbb mailing list [email protected] http://phenix-online.org/mailman/listinfo/cctbxbb