On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 16:12, Alan McIntyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 4:15 PM, Robert Kern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> We've been already been making that warning for some time now, in the >> proper venues. warning.warn() is good for DeprecationWarnings, but not >> this. We are good to go for nose being used in 1.2. > > Ok, so somebody tell me if I've got anything wrong here: > > - All the tests included in NumPy 1.2 will be run using nose (whether > it's included in NumPy or not). None of the tests will use any part > of the old test framework or assume that old test framework rules are > still valid.
Right. > - All the old test classes must be retained, with deprecation > warnings. Third party tests that use them must still work when run > with Numpy 1.2. Yes. > - The signature of numpy.test in 1.2 will be backward compatible with > 1.1, and it will at least return some indication of failure (if not > the same object as in 1.1). This will, by the way, make it different > from the signature and behavior of scipy.test. scipy.test() should be made to match numpy.test(). scipy.testing was a staging ground for the nose changes in numpy, not a separate branch of development. For my preference, we should accept the old argument signature with a deprecation warning but prefer the current signature. This is a little hairy, but such is life with deprecations. > - The output (to stdout/stderr) of numpy.test in 1.2 will be different > from 1.1, since nose isn't displaying the total number of tests it > finds in each subpackage. That's fine. -- 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 _______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@scipy.org http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
