2012/5/23 Nathaniel Smith <[email protected]> > On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 6:29 PM, Travis Oliphant <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Then are you suggesting that we need to back out the changes to the > casting > > rules as well, because this will also cause code to stop working. This > is > > part of my point. We are not being consistently cautious. > > I never understood exactly what changed with the casting rules, but > yeah, maybe. Still, the question of what our deprecation rules > *should* be is somewhat separate from the question of what we've > actually done (or even will do). You have to have ideals before you > can ask whether you're living up to them :-). > > Didn't the casting rules become strictly stricter, i.e. some > questionable operations that used to succeed now throw an error? If so > then that's not a *major* violation of my suggested rules, but yeah, I > guess it'd probably be better if they did warn. I imagine it wouldn't > be terribly difficult to implement (add a new > NPY_WARN_UNSAFE_CASTING_INTERNAL value, use it everywhere that used to > be UNSAFE but now will be SAFE?), but someone who understands better > what actually changed (Mark?) would have do it. >
It wasn't just stricter rules. Some operations involving in particular mixed scalar / array computations resulted in different outputs (with no warning). -=- Olivier
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list [email protected] http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
