W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > July to September 2010

Re: more aggregate tests

From: Gregory Williams <greg@evilfunhouse.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 09:54:20 -0400
Cc: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <5AFE28B9-CB6E-4EF9-B880-45E4D71F2923@evilfunhouse.com>
To: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
On Sep 14, 2010, at 4:26 AM, Andy Seaborne wrote:

> Greg,
> 
> I tried your tests : they look OK but require value-based result set testing which ARQ does not (currently) provide so it's an optical checking for now.
> 
> The new tests weren't in the entries list and so I've committed changes to the manifest for this to CVS.

Ah, missed that. Thanks.

> Greg's new tests:
> 
> Failure: Test 13 :: SUM with GROUP BY
> Got: 5 --------------------------------
> ------------------------------------
> | s         | sum                  |
> ====================================
> | :ints     | 6                    |
> | :mixed2   | 2.4000000000000004e0 |
> | :mixed1   | 3.2                  |
> | :doubles  | 32100.0e0            |
> | :decimals | 6.7                  |
> ------------------------------------
> Expected: 5 -----------------------------
> ----------------------
> | sum    | s         |
> ======================
> | 2.4E0  | :mixed2   |
> | 3.2    | :mixed1   |
> | 3.21E4 | :doubles  |
> | 6.7    | :decimals |
> | 6      | :ints     |
> ----------------------
> 
> "E" or "e" are legal which makes comparison by lexical form tricky.

Agreed. I tried to use canonical lexical form in both input and output data, but that's not guaranteed to survive a load/query.


> =======================================
> Failure: Test 15 :: AVG with GROUP BY
> Got: 3 --------------------------------
> ----------------------------------------
> | s       | avg                        |
> ========================================
> | :ints   | 2.000000000000000000000000 |
> | :mixed2 | 1.2000000000000002e0       |
> | :mixed1 | 1.600000000000000000000000 |
> ----------------------------------------
> Expected: 3 -----------------------------
> -------------------
> | avg   | s       |
> ===================
> | 2     | :ints   |
> | 1.2E0 | :mixed2 |
> | 1.6   | :mixed1 |
> -------------------
> 
> More of the same. Precision issues + e/E issues.

Not sure what to do about precision issues. Any thoughts? Canonical form helps, but loss of precision is a concern.

.greg
Received on Tuesday, 14 September 2010 13:54:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:43 GMT