[Numpy-discussion] ticket 788: possible blocker

Stéfan van der Walt stefan@sun.ac...
Tue May 13 01:56:35 CDT 2008

Hi Travis

2008/5/13 Travis E. Oliphant <oliphant@enthought.com>:
>  I think Stefan is asking me, not you.    I don't think you should feel
>  any sense of guilt.   I was the one who closed the ticket sans
>  regression test.   I tend to still be of the opinion that a bug fix
>  without a regression test is better than no bug fix at all.

I suppose people may be getting tired of me singing the same tune all
the time, but I wouldn't do it if I weren't deeply convinced of the
improvement in software quality resulting from good test coverage.
This is maybe even more true for NumPy than for other packages,
illustrated by the recent discussion on masked arrays.  The unit tests
act as a contract between ourselves and our users, and if this
contract is lacking (or missing!), we cannot guarantee that APIs or
even functionality will remain unbroken.  It may be best if we could
formalise the policy around this, so that I can either keep quiet or
expect a regression test with every check-in.

>  Obviously, whether future changes actually fix a bug (without
>  introducing new ones) is a strong argument for regression tests, and I
>  gratefully accept all tests submitted.

I believe we should not only be accepting tests -- we should be
writing them, too.


More information about the Numpy-discussion mailing list