[Numpy-discussion] change made to test_print.py

Robert Kern robert.kern@gmail....
Thu Jan 8 14:32:51 CST 2009

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 15:26, David Cournapeau <cournape@gmail.com> wrote:

> Personally, I don't like knownfailure much anyway: I feel like it is
> too easy to tag one test known failure, and then nobody cares about it
> anymore. Those formatting problems were already problems before - the
> tests only show the problem, it does not cause the problem, so I don't
> understand why it is so important: a 100 % running test suite with a
> problem which is not shown or a 95 % running test suite with the
> problem is the same thing; the code in numpy itself is exactly the
> same.

Don't check in failing tests without using knownfailure. Unit tests
are used by others to determine whether or not *they* broke things or
whether their installation failed. By checking in a failing test, you
are sending others on a wild goose chase trying to figure out what
they did wrong when they didn't.

Robert Kern

"I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless
enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as
though it had an underlying truth."
  -- Umberto Eco

More information about the Numpy-discussion mailing list