On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 3:38 PM, Nathaniel Smith <n...@pobox.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 12:32 PM, Matthew Brett <matthew.br...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 4:54 PM, Matthew Brett <matthew.br...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 4:01 PM, Andrew Collette > >> <andrew.colle...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> >From a more basic perspective, I think that adding a number to an > >>> array should never raise an exception. I've not used any other > >>> language in which this behavior takes place. In C, you have rollover > >>> behavior, in IDL you roll over or clip, and in NumPy you either roll > >>> or upcast, depending on the version. IDL, etc. manage to handle > >>> things like max() or total() in a sensible (or at least defensible) > >>> fashion, and without raising an error. > >> > >> That's a reasonable point. > >> > >> Looks like we lost consensus. > >> > >> What about returning to the 1.5 behavior instead? > > > > If we do return to the 1.5 behavior, we would need to think about > > doing this in 1.7. > > > > If there are a large number of 1.5.x and previous users who would > > upgrade to 1.7, leaving the 1.6 behavior in 1.7 will mean that they > > will get double the confusion: > > > > 1) The behavior has changed to something they weren't expecting > > 2) The behavior is going to change back very soon > > I disagree. 1.7 is basically done, the 1.6 changes are out there > already, and we still have work to do just to get consensus on how we > want to handle this, plus implement the changes. > I agree with Nathaniel. 1.7.0rc1 is out, so all that should go into 1.7.x from now on is bug fixes. Ralf
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
