[SciPy-dev] movement of testing.py to scipy_distutils

Pearu Peterson pearu at cens.ioc.ee
Mon Sep 16 16:21:24 CDT 2002


On Mon, 16 Sep 2002, eric jones wrote:

> Does anyone have any objections to moving testing.py from scipy_base to
> scipy_distutils?  It would make distribution of weave and other
> potential modules have one less dependency package.  Besides the blitz()
> stuff, weave doesn't rely on anything in scipy_base.  And, other than
> scipy_base it doesn't have any extension module dependencies.  I like to
> keep it that way.

+0.9

The only doubt that I have is that if the long term goal is to move stuff
from scipy_distutils to distutils, then ideally, scipy_distutils
package should become obsolete. But testing.py as well as auto_test.py and
logging.py do not fit into distutils purpose list...

> Hmmm.  I guess testing.py could become its own package (or stand alone
> module) like scipy_base and scipy_distutils also.  I think it actually
> was at one point...?

Currently it is only one file. Are there any extension plans for
testing.py so that at some point this package would consist of more than
just one file? May be auto_test.py and logging.py?

> Anyway, opinions and suggestions welcome.  I'd like to get a version of
> the weave stuff packaged up and ready for people to test (although docs
> are still not updated) by the end of the day.

In fact, since testing.py was in scipy_base, I did not use it in
f2py testing site --- a threshold for adding one dependency more was too 
high. If testing.py is moved to scipy_distutils, this threshold
vanishes...

Other issues:
Note that testing.py uses fastumath from scipy_base. Is replacing
fastumath with math cause any problems, in particularly, with Inf/NaN
stuff? (I guess it is easy to check this out.)

Pearu




More information about the Scipy-dev mailing list