Hi,
> We talked about this at the SciPy Sprint. Eventually, we will get
> there. However, if we do it before 1.0.5, it will require nose to run
> the NumPy tests. I'm concerned to make this kind of change, prior to 1.1
Ah, sorry, I heard of the conclusion, but had thought it was due to
the 2.
Matthew Brett wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've just finished moving the scipy tests over to nose.
>
> Thinking about it, it seems to me to be a good idea to do the same for numpy.
>
We talked about this at the SciPy Sprint. Eventually, we will get
there. However, if we do it before 1.0.5, it will requir
An added advantage is that is makes it much easier to run doctests:
numpy.test(doctests=True)
On Jan 14, 2008 11:36 AM, Fernando Perez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jan 14, 2008 5:21 AM, Matthew Brett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I've just finished moving the scipy tests over to
On Jan 14, 2008 5:21 AM, Matthew Brett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've just finished moving the scipy tests over to nose.
>
> Thinking about it, it seems to me to be a good idea to do the same for numpy.
> Any thoughts?
A big +1 from me.
Cheers,
f
_
Hi,
I've just finished moving the scipy tests over to nose.
Thinking about it, it seems to me to be a good idea to do the same for numpy.
The advantages of doing this now are that numpy and scipy would be in
parallel, that we can continue to have one testing system for both,
and that it would be
