[Numpy-discussion] Code samples in docstrings mistaken as doctests

[Michael Abshoff]

Charles R Harris wrote:
> 
> 
> On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 5:58 PM, Michael Abshoff 
> <michael.abshoff at googlemail.com <mailto:michael.abshoff at googlemail.com>> 
> wrote:
> 
>     Stéfan van der Walt wrote:
>      > 2008/6/24 Stéfan van der Walt <stefan at sun.ac.za
>     <mailto:stefan at sun.ac.za>>:
>      >> It should be fairly easy to execute the example code, just to make
>      >> sure it runs.  We can always work out a scheme to test its validity
>      >> later.
> 
>     Hi,
> 
>      > Mike Hansen just explained to me that the Sage doctest system
>     sets the
>      > random seed before executing each test.  If we address
>      >
>      > a) Random variables
> 
>     we have some small extensions to the doctesting framework that allow us
>     to mark doctests as "#random" so that the result it not checked. Carl
>     Witty wrote some code that makes the random number generator in a lot of
>     the Sage components behave consistently on all supported platforms.

Hi,

> 
> But there is more than one possible random number generator. If you do 
> that you are tied into one kind of generator and one kind of 
> initialization implementation.
> 
> Chuck
> 

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.

Cheers,

Michael

> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Numpy-discussion mailing list
> Numpy-discussion at scipy.org
> http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion