On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 22:53, Anne Archibald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 2008/6/23 Michael Abshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> Correct, but so far Carl has hooked into six out of the many random >> number generators in the various components of Sage. This way we can set >> a global seed and also more easily reproduce issues with algorithms >> where randomness plays a role without being forced to be on the same >> platform. There are still doctests in Sage where the randomness comes >> from sources not in randgen (Carl's code), but sooner or later we will >> get around to all of them. > > Doesn't this mean you can't change your implementation of random > number generators (for example choosing a different implementation of > generation of normally-distributed random numbers, or replacing the > Mersenne Twister) without causing countless doctests to fail > meaninglessly? It's not that bad. After you've verified that your new code works, you regenerate the examples. You check in both at the same time. -- 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
