Extend precession test with a second epoch one second later

[IsseiHasegawa]

Extend precession test with a second epoch (JD + 1s)

The paper table only gives vectors for one JD; repeat the PQXY vs Capitaine matrix comparison for JD + 1s without duplicating tabulated constants.

Made-with: Cursor

Description

• Extends TestPrecession::testPrecessionAnglesVondrak() in src/tests/testPrecession.cpp.
• After the existing checks that use the paper’s tabulated vectors for the reference JD, the same PQXY vs Capitaine construction is repeated for JD + 1 second.
• No new tabulated constants are added; this only strengthens consistency of the two parametrizations on a nearby epoch.
• No new dependencies.

Fixes # (none — add issue number if you opened one)

Screenshots (if appropriate):

N/A

Type of change

• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
• This change requires a documentation update
• Housekeeping

How Has This Been Tested?

• Built the testPrecession target and ran:
  • ctest --test-dir build-test --output-on-failure -R testPrecession
• Result: testPrecession passed.

Test Configuration:

• Operating system: macOS (darwin 26.x)
• Graphics Card: N/A (unit test only)

Checklist:

• My code follows the code style of this project.
• I have performed a self-review of my own code
• I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
• I have made corresponding changes to the documentation (header file)
• I have updated the respective chapter in the Stellarium User Guide
• My changes generate no new warnings
• I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
• New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
• Any dependent changes have been merged and published in downstream modules

[github-actions]

Great PR! Please pay attention to the following items before merging:

Files matching src/**/*.cpp:

• Are possibly unused includes removed?

This is an automatically generated QA checklist based on modified files.

[gzotti]

Adding the same dates plus one second IMO does not qualify to remove the intent of the TODO message. Adding a few centuries might do it, but we have no "official" reference values.

[gzotti]

These includes were probably used by code now only commented away, and will be needed when taking up development in case any doubts in the precession model appear.

[gzotti]

TBH I don't see the point here.