[Numpy-discussion] Making numpy sensible: backward compatibility please

Henry Gomersall heng@cantab....
Fri Sep 28 16:53:28 CDT 2012


On Fri, 2012-09-28 at 16:43 -0500, Travis Oliphant wrote:
> I agree that we should be much more cautious about semantic changes in
> the 1.X series of NumPy.    How we handle situations where 1.6 changed
> things from 1.5 and wasn't reported until now is an open question and
> depends on the particular problem in question.    I agree that we
> should be much more cautious about changes (particularly semantic
> changes that will break existing code). 

One thing I noticed in my (short and shallow) foray into numpy
development was the rather limited scope of the tests in the area I
touched (fft). I know not the extent to which this is true across the
code base, but I know from experience the value of a truly exhaustive
test set (every line tested for every condition). Perhaps someone with a
deeper knowledge could comment on this?

I also know from experience the huge discipline it takes to do such test
driven coding, especially when one has limited time and motivation on a
project! Also, writing tests for legacy code is painful! This is not
meant as a criticism. Like Gael, I think Numpy is a fantastic project
that has achieved great things.

Henry



More information about the NumPy-Discussion mailing list