On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 10:31 PM, Charles R Harris <charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Nathaniel Smith <n...@pobox.com> wrote: >> >> On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 9:48 PM, Charles R Harris >> <charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 2:41 PM, Nathaniel Smith <n...@pobox.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 9:33 PM, Charles R Harris >> >> <charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > >> >> > On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 2:09 PM, Nathaniel Smith <n...@pobox.com> >> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 9:02 PM, Ralf Gommers >> >> >> <ralf.gomm...@gmail.com> >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> > >> >> >> > On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 10:00 PM, Charles R Harris >> >> >> > <charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 1:42 PM, Charles R Harris >> >> >> >> <charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> Sebastian Seberg has fixed one class of test failures due to the >> >> >> >>> indexing >> >> >> >>> changes in numpy 1.9.0b1. There are some remaining errors, and >> >> >> >>> in >> >> >> >>> the >> >> >> >>> case >> >> >> >>> of the Matplotlib failures, they look to me to be Matplotlib >> >> >> >>> bugs. >> >> >> >>> The >> >> >> >>> 2-d >> >> >> >>> arrays that cause the error are returned by the overloaded >> >> >> >>> _interpolate_single_key function in CubicTriInterpolator that is >> >> >> >>> documented >> >> >> >>> in the base class to return a 1-d array, whereas the actual >> >> >> >>> dimensions >> >> >> >>> are >> >> >> >>> of the form (n, 1). The question is, what is the best work >> >> >> >>> around >> >> >> >>> here >> >> >> >>> for >> >> >> >>> these sorts errors? Can we afford to break Matplotlib and other >> >> >> >>> packages on >> >> >> >>> account of a bug that was previously accepted by Numpy? >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > It depends how bad the break is, but in principle I'd say that >> >> >> > breaking >> >> >> > Matplotlib is not OK. >> >> >> >> >> >> I agree. If it's easy to hack around it and issue a warning for now, >> >> >> and doesn't have other negative consequences, then IMO we should >> >> >> give >> >> >> matplotlib a release or so worth of grace period to fix things. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > Here is another example, from skimage. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > ====================================================================== >> >> > ERROR: test_join.test_relabel_sequential_offset1 >> >> > >> >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> > Traceback (most recent call last): >> >> > File "X:\Python27-x64\lib\site-packages\nose\case.py", line 197, in >> >> > runTest >> >> > self.test(*self.arg) >> >> > File >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > "X:\Python27-x64\lib\site-packages\skimage\segmentation\tests\test_join.py", >> >> > line 30, in test_relabel_sequential_offset1 >> >> > ar_relab, fw, inv = relabel_sequential(ar) >> >> > File >> >> > "X:\Python27-x64\lib\site-packages\skimage\segmentation\_join.py", >> >> > line 127, in relabel_sequential >> >> > forward_map[labels0] = np.arange(offset, offset + len(labels0) + >> >> > 1) >> >> > ValueError: shape mismatch: value array of shape (6,) could not be >> >> > broadcast >> >> > to indexing result of shape (5,) >> >> > >> >> > Which is pretty clearly a coding error. Unfortunately, the error is >> >> > in >> >> > the >> >> > package rather than the test. >> >> > >> >> > The only easy way to fix all of these sorts of things is to revert >> >> > the >> >> > indexing changes, and I'm loathe to do that. Grrr... >> >> >> >> Ugh, that's pretty bad :-/. Do you really think we can't use a >> >> band-aid over the new indexing code, though? >> > >> > >> > Yeah, we can. But Sebastian doesn't have time and I'm unfamiliar with >> > the >> > code, so it may take a while... >> >> Fair enough! >> >> I guess that if what are (arguably) bugs in matplotlib and >> scikit-image are holding up the numpy release, then it's worth CC'ing >> their mailing lists in case someone feels like volunteering to fix >> it... ;-). > > I can do that ;) Doesn't help with the release though unless we want to > document the errors in the release notes and tell folks to wait on the next > release of the packages.
Oh, I meant, in case they want to fix numpy so that their packages don't break :-). -- Nathaniel J. Smith Postdoctoral researcher - Informatics - University of Edinburgh http://vorpus.org _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion