On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 8:37 AM, <josef.p...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 10:25 AM, David Cournapeau <courn...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 12:14 AM, <josef.p...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 10:01 AM, David Cournapeau <courn...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >>> On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 11:45 PM, Charles R Harris > >>> <charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Might be nice to print out the actual values of np.spacing and > np.nextafter > >>>> here. > >>>> > >>> > >>> Yes, I should add some utilities to print those for this kind of test. > >>> But in this case, I know the problem: mingw gcc use 80 bits long > >>> double but it uses the MS runtime which considers double and long > >>> double to be the same (8 bytes). > >>> > >>> I think the real fix is to force npy_longdouble to be double on mingw, > >>> but I don't want to make that change now for 1.4.0. > >> > >> adding the failing type in the test to the failure message would also > >> be helpful > > > > Yes, you're right. I also used the nose facility for using generators > > for complex corner cases, but with retrospect, it is not so useful, > > because you don't get a name when you have a failure (or maybe I am > > using it wrong). > > I don't know what the policy for the use of assert in numpy is, > but if you use the function np.testing.assert_ then you can add a > failure message with eg. repr(t) > > They should all use assert_ as it is designed to work even in optimized environments. However, this is not enforced, official policy ;)
Chuck
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
