Re: [Numpy-discussion] ticket 788: possible blocker

2008/5/14 Matthew Brett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Hi, > > > Stefan, sometimes the fix really is clear and a test is like closing the > > barn door after the horse has bolted. Sometimes it isn't even clear *how* > to > > test. I committed one fix and omitted a test because I couldn't think of > > anyt

Re: [Numpy-discussion] ticket 788: possible blocker

Hi, > Stefan, sometimes the fix really is clear and a test is like closing the > barn door after the horse has bolted. Sometimes it isn't even clear *how* to > test. I committed one fix and omitted a test because I couldn't think of > anything really reasonable. I think concentrating on unit tests

Re: [Numpy-discussion] ticket 788: possible blocker

On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 4:40 PM, Stéfan van der Walt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 2008/5/13 Travis E. Oliphant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Robert Kern wrote: > > > On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 11:12 AM, Travis E. Oliphant > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > >> Besides, having a "test-p

Re: [Numpy-discussion] ticket 788: possible blocker

2008/5/13 Travis E. Oliphant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Robert Kern wrote: > > On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 11:12 AM, Travis E. Oliphant > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > >> Besides, having a "test-per-checkin" is not the proper mapping in my > >> mind. I'd rather see whole check-ins devot

Re: [Numpy-discussion] ticket 788: possible blocker

Travis E. Oliphant wrote: > Robert Kern wrote: >> On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 11:12 AM, Travis E. Oliphant >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >>> Besides, having a "test-per-checkin" is not the proper mapping in my >>> mind. I'd rather see whole check-ins devoted to testing large pieces >>> o

Re: [Numpy-discussion] ticket 788: possible blocker

Charles R Harris wrote: > > > On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 11:25 AM, Robert Kern <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > wrote: > > On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 11:12 AM, Travis E. Oliphant > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > > Besides, having a "test-per-check

Re: [Numpy-discussion] ticket 788: possible blocker

Robert Kern wrote: > On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 11:12 AM, Travis E. Oliphant > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> Besides, having a "test-per-checkin" is not the proper mapping in my >> mind. I'd rather see whole check-ins devoted to testing large pieces >> of code rather than spend all unit-t

Re: [Numpy-discussion] ticket 788: possible blocker

On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 11:25 AM, Robert Kern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 11:12 AM, Travis E. Oliphant > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Besides, having a "test-per-checkin" is not the proper mapping in my > > mind. I'd rather see whole check-ins devoted to testing l

Re: [Numpy-discussion] ticket 788: possible blocker

On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 11:12 AM, Travis E. Oliphant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Besides, having a "test-per-checkin" is not the proper mapping in my > mind. I'd rather see whole check-ins devoted to testing large pieces > of code rather than spend all unit-test foo on a rigid policy of >

Re: [Numpy-discussion] ticket 788: possible blocker

Stéfan van der Walt wrote: > Hi Travis > > 2008/5/13 Travis E. Oliphant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> I think Stefan is asking me, not you.I don't think you should feel >> any sense of guilt. I was the one who closed the ticket sans >> regression test. I tend to still be of the opinion th

Re: [Numpy-discussion] ticket 788: possible blocker

Hi Travis 2008/5/13 Travis E. Oliphant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I think Stefan is asking me, not you.I don't think you should feel > any sense of guilt. I was the one who closed the ticket sans > regression test. I tend to still be of the opinion that a bug fix > without a regression tes

Re: [Numpy-discussion] ticket 788: possible blocker

Eric Firing wrote: > Stéfan van der Walt wrote: > >> 2008/5/12 Eric Firing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> >>> To close out this thread: >>> >>> With r5155 Travis fixed the problem, so the ticket is closed. >>> >> Strange, when I look over that patch, my keyboard automatically holds >> in S

Re: [Numpy-discussion] ticket 788: possible blocker

Robert Kern wrote: > On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 6:00 PM, Eric Firing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Stéfan van der Walt wrote: >> > 2008/5/12 Eric Firing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> >> To close out this thread: >> >> >> >> With r5155 Travis fixed the problem, so the ticket is closed. >> > >> > Stran

Re: [Numpy-discussion] ticket 788: possible blocker

On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 6:00 PM, Eric Firing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Stéfan van der Walt wrote: > > 2008/5/12 Eric Firing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> To close out this thread: > >> > >> With r5155 Travis fixed the problem, so the ticket is closed. > > > > Strange, when I look over that pa

Re: [Numpy-discussion] ticket 788: possible blocker

Stéfan van der Walt wrote: > 2008/5/12 Eric Firing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> To close out this thread: >> >> With r5155 Travis fixed the problem, so the ticket is closed. > > Strange, when I look over that patch, my keyboard automatically holds > in Shift and starts typing 1 through 9: > > (*&@#*&

Re: [Numpy-discussion] ticket 788: possible blocker

2008/5/12 Eric Firing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > To close out this thread: > > With r5155 Travis fixed the problem, so the ticket is closed. Strange, when I look over that patch, my keyboard automatically holds in Shift and starts typing 1 through 9: (*&@#*&@#&[EMAIL PROTECTED](*&)@# I ask you with

Re: [Numpy-discussion] ticket 788: possible blocker

To close out this thread: With r5155 Travis fixed the problem, so the ticket is closed. Thank you! Eric Eric Firing wrote: > I have added a patch to the ticket. I believe it fixes the problem. It ___ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@s

Re: [Numpy-discussion] ticket 788: possible blocker

I have added a patch to the ticket. I believe it fixes the problem. It required mirroring a very complicated logical expression from PyArray_CastToType in array_cast. I suspect that for readability, this expression should be encapsulated somewhere as a function, with a signature like int Py

[Numpy-discussion] ticket 788: possible blocker

Jarrod et al., I just ran into a nasty bug, described in ticket 788: under some circumstances, which I don't understand, the astype method fails to return a copy and returns the original array instead. It causes bizarre behavior in basemap (Jeff Whitaker's mapping toolkit for matplotlib), whic