| 2009 | # tested. |
| 2010 | @unittest.skipUnless(verbose, 'requires verbose mode') |
| 2011 | def test_exceptions(self): |
| 2012 | try: |
| 2013 | x = math.exp(-1000000000) |
| 2014 | except: |
| 2015 | # mathmodule.c is failing to weed out underflows from libm, or |
| 2016 | # we've got an fp format with huge dynamic range |
| 2017 | self.fail("underflowing exp() should not have raised " |
| 2018 | "an exception") |
| 2019 | if x != 0: |
| 2020 | self.fail("underflowing exp() should have returned 0") |
| 2021 | |
| 2022 | # If this fails, probably using a strict IEEE-754 conforming libm, and x |
| 2023 | # is +Inf afterwards. But Python wants overflows detected by default. |
| 2024 | try: |
| 2025 | x = math.exp(1000000000) |
| 2026 | except OverflowError: |
| 2027 | pass |
| 2028 | else: |
| 2029 | self.fail("overflowing exp() didn't trigger OverflowError") |
| 2030 | |
| 2031 | # If this fails, it could be a puzzle. One odd possibility is that |
| 2032 | # mathmodule.c's macros are getting confused while comparing |
| 2033 | # Inf (HUGE_VAL) to a NaN, and artificially setting errno to ERANGE |
| 2034 | # as a result (and so raising OverflowError instead). |
| 2035 | try: |
| 2036 | x = math.sqrt(-1.0) |
| 2037 | except ValueError: |
| 2038 | pass |
| 2039 | else: |
| 2040 | self.fail("sqrt(-1) didn't raise ValueError") |
| 2041 | |
| 2042 | @requires_IEEE_754 |
| 2043 | def test_testfile(self): |