let see if this works on 32-bit crap
... without actually disabling the test for 0.0 for others.
Change-Id: I014278dd38535274274536e3187d6bb8cd4dbc2a
diff --git a/sc/qa/unit/ucalc_formula.cxx b/sc/qa/unit/ucalc_formula.cxx
index 3c23d47..c9815a7 100644
--- a/sc/qa/unit/ucalc_formula.cxx
+++ b/sc/qa/unit/ucalc_formula.cxx
@@ -6596,8 +6596,18 @@ void Test::testFuncMDETERM()
aFormulaBuffer[12] = aColCodes[nSize-1];
aFormulaBuffer[13] = static_cast<sal_Unicode>( '0' + nSize );
m_pDoc->SetString(aPos, aFormulaBuffer.toString());
// On crappy 32-bit targets, presumably without extended precision on
// interim results or optimization not catching it, this test fails
// when comparing to 0.0, so have a narrow error margin. See also
// commit message of 8140309d636d4a870875f2dd75ed3dfff2c0fbaf
#if SAL_TYPES_SIZEOFPOINTER == 4
CPPUNIT_ASSERT_DOUBLES_EQUAL_MESSAGE("Calculation of MDETERM incorrect for singular integer matrix",
0.0, m_pDoc->GetValue(aPos), 10e-4);
0.0, m_pDoc->GetValue(aPos), 1e-12);
#else
CPPUNIT_ASSERT_EQUAL_MESSAGE("Calculation of MDETERM incorrect for singular integer matrix",
0.0, m_pDoc->GetValue(aPos));
#endif
}
int aVals[] = {23, 31, 13, 12, 34, 64, 34, 31, 98, 32, 33, 63, 45, 54, 65, 76};
