On 17 July 2012 12:12, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> mark florisson, 17.07.2012 12:15:
>> On 17 July 2012 09:58, Stefan Behnel wrote:
>>> mark florisson, 10.07.2012 11:20:
Perhaps we should run
the 2x tests from py27 down to 2.4. Tests in newer python's are less
likely to fail.
>>>
>>> Tes
mark florisson, 17.07.2012 12:15:
> On 17 July 2012 09:58, Stefan Behnel wrote:
>> mark florisson, 10.07.2012 11:20:
>>> Perhaps we should run
>>> the 2x tests from py27 down to 2.4. Tests in newer python's are less
>>> likely to fail.
>>
>> Test failures are bad in general, though. Just because yo
On 17 July 2012 09:58, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> mark florisson, 10.07.2012 11:20:
>> On 10 July 2012 08:24, Stefan Behnel wrote:
>>> I've fixed some of the errors that current block the tests. The remaining
>>> failures in the memory view tests exist in both Py2.4 and 2.5, which hints
>>> at a probl
mark florisson, 10.07.2012 11:20:
> On 10 July 2012 08:24, Stefan Behnel wrote:
>> I've fixed some of the errors that current block the tests. The remaining
>> failures in the memory view tests exist in both Py2.4 and 2.5, which hints
>> at a problem with the buffer support in numpy.pxd.
>>
>> http
On 10 July 2012 08:24, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've fixed some of the errors that current block the tests. The remaining
> failures in the memory view tests exist in both Py2.4 and 2.5, which hints
> at a problem with the buffer support in numpy.pxd.
>
> https://sage.math.washington.edu:809
