On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Nathaniel Smith <n...@pobox.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 7:47 PM, Ralf Gommers <ralf.gomm...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 6:37 AM, Tony Yu <tsy...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> It seems like the defaults for `allclose` and `assert_allclose` should > >> match, and an absolute tolerance of 0 is probably not ideal. I guess > this is > >> a pretty big behavioral change, but the current default for > >> `assert_allclose` doesn't seem ideal. > > > > I agree, current behavior quite annoying. It would make sense to change > the > > atol default to 1e-8, but technically it's a backwards compatibility > break. > > Would probably have a very minor impact though. Changing the default for > > rtol in one of the functions may be much more painful though, I don't > think > > that should be done. > > Currently we have: > > allclose: rtol=1e-5, atol=1e-8 > assert_allclose: rtol=1e-7, atol=0 > > Why would it be painful to change assert_allclose to match allclose? > It would weaken some tests, but no code would break. > We might break our code, if suddenly our test suite doesn't do what it is supposed to do. (rough guess: 40% of the statsmodels code are unit tests.) Josef > > -n > > -- > 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 >
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
