[Numpy-discussion] Reminder: code freeze for bet at the end of the WE
Sat Mar 14 16:12:14 CDT 2009
On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 4:58 PM, Charles R Harris
> On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 2:28 PM, <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 4:22 PM, Sturla Molden <email@example.com> wrote:
>> >> On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 1:37 PM, <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> >> OK. One more question: how often do the tests fail? I want to include a
>> >> note
>> >> to repeat testing if the test fails.
>> > I don't like this. I think the prngs should use fixed seeds known to
>> > pass
>> > the test. Depending on confidence intervals in the units tests is
>> > really,
>> > really bad style. Tests should be deterministic.
>> > S.M.
>> The hypergeometric tests are on the support of the distribution and
>> should never fail. And the outcome is not random.
>> The test of logser with N = 100000 also should be pretty exact and
>> fail only with very low probability in the patched version. But again
>> this is testet in scipy.stats.
>> I think Sturlas idea to find a random seed that differentiates before
>> and after will be better for numpy, and using only a small sample size
>> e.g. N=1000, since it's pretty fast. But since I don't have an
>> unpatched numpy version available right now, I cannot do this.
> Done. Thanks for the fixes and tests.
Thanks for taking care of this.
I will run my scipy.stats.distribution test over it before 1.3 is
released and enable the tests in scipy trunk after the release.
More information about the Numpy-discussion