ChebyCoeff::slope_a() for nontrivial profiles typically returns extremely high values - at least for my build environment (gcc 6.4.0).
This is because the loop index n is given as auto, becoming an unsigned int, but its negation is required in the computation leading to an overflow.
I wonder if some compilers behave differently leading to this not being picked up before.
Anyway, this can be fixed quickly by using an int instead, as in ChebyCoeff::slope_b().
ChebyCoeff::slope_a()for nontrivial profiles typically returns extremely high values - at least for my build environment (gcc 6.4.0).This is because the loop index
nis given asauto, becoming anunsigned int, but its negation is required in the computation leading to an overflow.I wonder if some compilers behave differently leading to this not being picked up before.
Anyway, this can be fixed quickly by using an
intinstead, as inChebyCoeff::slope_b().