[SciPy-User] peer review of scientific software

josef.pktd@gmai... josef.pktd@gmai...
Thu Jun 6 08:49:31 CDT 2013

On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 8:57 AM, Matthew Brett <matthew.brett@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 1:19 PM,  <josef.pktd@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 7:21 AM, Matthew Brett <matthew.brett@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 6:23 AM, Jerome Kieffer <Jerome.Kieffer@esrf.fr> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 5 Jun 2013 23:08:10 +0100
>>>> Nathaniel Smith <njs@pobox.com> wrote:
>>>>> But... have you ever sat down and written tests for a piece of widely
>>>>> used academic software? (Not LAPACK, but some random large package
>>>>> that's widely used within a field but doesn't have a comprehensive
>>>>> test suite of its own.) Everyone I've heard of who's done this
>>>>> discovers bugs all over the place. Would you personally trip over them
>>>>> if you didn't test the code? Who knows, maybe not. And probably most
>>>>> of the rest -- off by one errors here and there, maybe an incorrect
>>>>> normalizing constant, etc., -- end up not mattering too much. Or maybe
>>>>> they do. How could you even tell?
>>>> I found bugs in scipy.ndimage.shift and in scipy.stats.linregress.
>>>> The first took me ages to be spotted as I was assuming the error was on
>>>> my side as scipy was seen as a "large library widely used".
>>> Well said.  See also Blake Griffith's current struggles with
>>> scipy.sparse (last message title "parametric tests, known failures and
>>> skipped tests").
>> As far as I understand these are not BUGs.
>> These are TDD test failures during development while adding support to
>> additional dtypes.
> See for example : https://github.com/scipy/scipy/issues/2542
> In particular that ticket ends with "Existing tests only tested lil
> with float data."

you cut off the other part of my statement

But that doesn't mean scipy.sparse didn't work correctly for the
initial implementation for float matrices.



> Not that this is surprising - I learned to test the hell out of
> everything by finding how often I wrote broken code myself.
> Cheers,
> Matthew
> _______________________________________________
> SciPy-User mailing list
> SciPy-User@scipy.org
> http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/scipy-user

More information about the SciPy-User mailing list