Re: [Numpy-discussion] Ticket #794 and can o' worms.

On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 10:41 PM, Charles R Harris < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 8:32 PM, Timothy Hochberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > >> >> >> On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 3:47 PM, Robert Kern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> >>> On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 17:42, Charles R

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Ticket #794 and can o' worms.

On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 8:32 PM, Timothy Hochberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 3:47 PM, Robert Kern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > >> On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 17:42, Charles R Harris >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > Hi All, >> > >> > I "fixed" ticket #754, but it leads

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Testing: Failed examples don't raise errors on buildbot.

On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 11:34 PM, Gael Varoquaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > For the rest I can't figure out how to get the information. I suspect we > can standardise on things around six month old. Debian unstable tracks > closely upstream, Ubuntu and Fedora have a release cycle of 6 months, I >

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Testing: Failed examples don't raise errors on buildbot.

On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 11:19:57PM -0400, Alan McIntyre wrote: > On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 11:17 PM, Gael Varoquaux > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > There might be a case to move to 10.3, considering the large amount of > > bug fixes, but in general I think it is a bad idea to require leading > > edg

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Testing: Failed examples don't raise errors on buildbot.

On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 11:17 PM, Gael Varoquaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > There might be a case to move to 10.3, considering the large amount of > bug fixes, but in general I think it is a bad idea to require leading > edge packages. The reason being that you would like people to be able to > r

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Testing: Failed examples don't raise errors on buildbot.

On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 11:09:04PM -0400, Alan McIntyre wrote: > Actually I was considering asking to move the minimum nose version up > to 0.10.3 just because it's the current version before this aesthetic > issue came up. There's about 30 bug fixes between 0.10.0 and 0.10.3, > including one that

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Testing: Failed examples don't raise errors on buildbot.

On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 10:56 PM, Robert Kern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I don't think aesthetics are worth requiring a particular version. > numpy doesn't need it; the users can decide whether they want it or > not. We should try to have it installed on the buildbots, though, > since we *are* th

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Testing: Failed examples don't raise errors on buildbot.

On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 21:47, Alan McIntyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 9:17 PM, Alan McIntyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> The skipped test verbosity is annoying; I'll see if there's a way to >> make that a bit cleaner-looking for some low verbosity level. > > The latest

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Testing: Failed examples don't raise errors on buildbot.

On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 9:17 PM, Alan McIntyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The skipped test verbosity is annoying; I'll see if there's a way to > make that a bit cleaner-looking for some low verbosity level. The latest release version of nose from easy_install (0.10.3) doesn't generate that verbo

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Ticket #794 and can o' worms.

On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 3:47 PM, Robert Kern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 17:42, Charles R Harris > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > I "fixed" ticket #754, but it leads to a ton of problems. The original > > discussion is here. The problems that arise come fro

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Ticket #794 and can o' worms.

On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 20:32, Charles R Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 4:47 PM, Robert Kern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 17:42, Charles R Harris >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > Hi All, >> > >> > I "fixed" ticket #754, but it leads to a

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Ticket #794 and can o' worms.

On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 4:47 PM, Robert Kern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 17:42, Charles R Harris > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > I "fixed" ticket #754, but it leads to a ton of problems. The original > > discussion is here. The problems that arise come fro

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Testing: Failed examples don't raise errors on buildbot.

On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 7:10 PM, Charles R Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Not raising errors seems ok for examples, but some of the unit tests are > also implemented as doctests and the failures are hidden in the logs. I'm > not sure what to do about this, but thought it worth pointing out. Al

[Numpy-discussion] Testing: Failed examples don't raise errors on buildbot.

Alan, Stefan Not raising errors seems ok for examples, but some of the unit tests are also implemented as doctests and the failures are hidden in the logs. I'm not sure what to do about this, but thought it worth pointing out. Also, it would be nice if skipped tests didn't generate large bits of p

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Ticket #794 and can o' worms.

On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 17:42, Charles R Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi All, > > I "fixed" ticket #754, but it leads to a ton of problems. The original > discussion is here. The problems that arise come from conversion to > different types. > > In [26]: a > Out[26]: array([ Inf, -Inf, NaN,

[Numpy-discussion] Ticket #794 and can o' worms.

Hi All, I "fixed" ticket #754, but it leads to a ton of problems. The original discussion is here. The problems that arise come from conversion to different types. In [26]: a Out[26]: array([ Inf, -Inf, NaN, 0., 3.

[Numpy-discussion] Windows_XP buildbot error.

The log file shows: File "c:\numpy-buildbot\numpy\b11\install\Lib\site-packages\numpy\lib\tests\test_format.py", line 429, in test_memmap_roundtrip fp = open(nfn, 'wb') IOError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory: 'c:\\docume~1\\thomas\\locals~1\\temp\\tmp_yrykj\\normal.npy' Is this some

[Numpy-discussion] Dealing with NAN.

The NAN macro isn't defined on all platforms and we have various workarounds scattered here and there. Is it reasonable to determine a suitable value of NAN for the various float types as part of the initial setup and configuration and have the results appended to one of the include files? This sho

[Numpy-discussion] MSVC warnings.

The Windows_XP buildbot shows several warnings about npy_intp -> int conversions. Two of them look OK, but probably explicit casts should be made. The third is: numpy\core\src\ufuncobject.c(2422) : warning C4244: '=' : conversion from 'npy_intp' to 'int', possible loss of data Which looks possibl

Re: [Numpy-discussion] 1.1.1rc1 to be tagged tonight

Jarrod Millman wrote: Hello, This is a reminder that 1.1.1rc1 will be tagged tonight. Chuck is planning to spend some time today fixing a few final bugs on the 1.1.x branch. If anyone else is planning to commit anything to the 1.1.x branch today, please let me know immediately. Obviously now

[Numpy-discussion] 1.1.1rc1 to be tagged tonight

Hello, This is a reminder that 1.1.1rc1 will be tagged tonight. Chuck is planning to spend some time today fixing a few final bugs on the 1.1.x branch. If anyone else is planning to commit anything to the 1.1.x branch today, please let me know immediately. Obviously now is not the time to commi

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Ticket review: #848, leak in PyArray_DescrFromType

On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 5:00 AM, Stéfan van der Walt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 2008/7/20 Michael Abbott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> I'm very impressed with your ability to follow these reference count > >> issues. Especially given that you only started learning about the > >> Python C-API a few

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Ticket review: #848, leak in PyArray_DescrFromType

2008/7/20 Michael Abbott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Sun, 20 Jul 2008, Stéfan van der Walt wrote: >> 2008/7/20 Michael Abbott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> > C, then C++ (which I now regard as a serious mistake) and finally shell >> It's scary how many of us were scarred for life by C++. > > What's really

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Ticket review: #848, leak in PyArray_DescrFromType

2008/7/20 Michael Abbott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Sun, 20 Jul 2008, Stéfan van der Walt wrote: >> 2008/7/20 Michael Abbott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> > C, then C++ (which I now regard as a serious mistake) and finally shell >> It's scary how many of us were scarred for life by C++. > > What's really

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Ticket review: #848, leak in PyArray_DescrFromType

On Sun, 20 Jul 2008, Stéfan van der Walt wrote: > 2008/7/20 Michael Abbott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > C, then C++ (which I now regard as a serious mistake) and finally shell > It's scary how many of us were scarred for life by C++. What's really annoying for me is that my most recent big project (h

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Branch cuts, inf, nan, C99 compliance

On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 12:10:23 + (UTC) Pauli Virtanen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > Sorry, > > Sun, 20 Jul 2008 10:18:47 +0200, Nils Wagner wrote: > >> ERROR: test_umath.TestC99.test_catanh(, >>(nan, nan), >> (nan, nan), '') >> FloatingPointError: invalid value encountered in arctanh

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Branch cuts, inf, nan, C99 compliance

Hi, Sorry, Sun, 20 Jul 2008 10:18:47 +0200, Nils Wagner wrote: > ERROR: test_umath.TestC99.test_catanh(, (nan, nan), > (nan, nan), '') > FloatingPointError: invalid value encountered in arctanh Skipped now. > ERROR: test_umath.TestC99.test_clog(, (1.0, nan), (nan, > nan), '') > FloatingPointEr

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Ticket review: #848, leak in PyArray_DescrFromType

2008/7/20 Michael Abbott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> I'm very impressed with your ability to follow these reference count >> issues. Especially given that you only started learning about the >> Python C-API a few months ago (if I remember correctly). > Alas no. I'm a bit of an old lag really, I did d

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Ticket review: #848, leak in PyArray_DescrFromType

Travis, thank you for your encouraging words. On Sat, 19 Jul 2008, Travis E. Oliphant wrote: > Really this code "grew" from a simple thing into a complicated thing as > more "features" were added. This is a common issue that happens all > over the place. Aye. > The reason I say I'm not sure

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Branch cuts, inf, nan, C99 compliance

On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 02:34:48 -0600 "Charles R Harris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 2:18 AM, Nils Wagner ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > >> On Sat, 19 Jul 2008 13:29:45 -0500 >> "Travis E. Oliphant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > Pauli Virtanen wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Branch cuts, inf, nan, C99 compliance

On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 03:34, Charles R Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > What architecture and OS? I get the following on OS X 10.5.3 Intel Core 2 Duo: == FAIL: test_umath.TestC99.test_clog(, (-0.0, -0.0), (-inf, -0.0), 'divi

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Branch cuts, inf, nan, C99 compliance

On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 2:18 AM, Nils Wagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, 19 Jul 2008 13:29:45 -0500 > "Travis E. Oliphant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Pauli Virtanen wrote: > >> Hi all, > >> > >> Re: Ticket 854. > >> > >> I wrote tests for the branch cuts for all complex arc* > >>func

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Branch cuts, inf, nan, C99 compliance

On Sat, 19 Jul 2008 13:29:45 -0500 "Travis E. Oliphant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Pauli Virtanen wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> Re: Ticket 854. >> >> I wrote tests for the branch cuts for all complex arc* >>functions >> in umathmodule. It turns out that all except arccosh >>were OK. >> The formula