[Numpy-discussion] nose changes checked in

Robert Kern robert.kern@gmail....
Wed Jun 18 16:24:16 CDT 2008


On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 16:12, Alan McIntyre <alan.mcintyre@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 4:15 PM, Robert Kern <robert.kern@gmail.com> wrote:
>> We've been already been making that warning for some time now, in the
>> proper venues. warning.warn() is good for DeprecationWarnings, but not
>> this. We are good to go for nose being used in 1.2.
>
> Ok, so somebody tell me if I've got anything wrong here:
>
> - All the tests included in NumPy 1.2 will be run using nose (whether
> it's included in NumPy or not).  None of the tests will use any part
> of the old test framework or assume that old test framework rules are
> still valid.

Right.

> - All the old test classes must be retained, with deprecation
> warnings.  Third party tests that use them must still work when run
> with Numpy 1.2.

Yes.

> - The signature of numpy.test in 1.2 will be backward compatible with
> 1.1, and it will at least return some indication of failure (if not
> the same object as in 1.1).  This will, by the way, make it different
> from the signature and behavior of scipy.test.

scipy.test() should be made to match numpy.test(). scipy.testing was a
staging ground for the nose changes in numpy, not a separate branch of
development.

For my preference, we should accept the old argument signature with a
deprecation warning but prefer the current signature. This is a little
hairy, but such is life with deprecations.

> - The output (to stdout/stderr) of numpy.test in 1.2 will be different
> from 1.1, since nose isn't displaying the total number of tests it
> finds in each subpackage.

That's fine.

-- 
Robert Kern

"I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless
enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as
though it had an underlying truth."
 -- Umberto Eco


More information about the Numpy-discussion mailing list