[Numpy-discussion] Binary ufuncs: minimum

[Charles R Harris]

On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 4:11 PM, Travis E. Oliphant <oliphant@enthought.com>
wrote:

>
> >
> > So the segfaults are defined behavior? ;) It's like pulling teeth
> > without anesthesia to get these things defined and everyone is going
> > to think I'm an a-hole. It's a dirty job, but someone has got to do it.
> I actually appreciate what you are doing.   Obviously the segfaults are
> bugs.
>
> It's just that there are constraints we have to work within (unless you
> are proposing to change the general versus specific coercion
> behavior).   These constraints might change the testing approach that is
> taken as well as the possible proposed solutions.   It's hard to engage
> the conversation until the questions show an understanding of that.
>
> My point is that we should look at the code to determine what is the
> expected behavior because not only is that what is being done, but that
> is also the framework we currently have within which to make changes.
> It is not much different from what Numeric originally provided.
>

That's why I wrote the script to determine what the code is currently doing.
That way we can all look at the results instead of reading the source.

<snip>

Chuck
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://projects.scipy.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/attachments/20080527/835a2be1/attachment.html