[Numpy-discussion] Release blockers for 1.4.0 ?

[Charles R Harris]

On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 11:16 AM, Charles R Harris <charlesr.harris at gmail.com
> wrote:

>
>
> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 10:31 AM, David Cournapeau <cournape at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 1:48 AM, Charles R Harris
>> <charlesr.harris at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 8:24 AM, David Cournapeau <cournape at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> There are a few issues which have been found on numpy 1.4.0, which
>> worry
>> >> me:
>> >>
>> >> # 1317: segfaults for integer division overflow
>> >> # 1318: all FPU exceptions ignored by default
>> >>
>> >> #1318 worries me the most: I think it is a pretty serious regression,
>> >> since things like this go unnoticed:
>> >>
>> >> x = np.array([1, 2, 3, 4]) / 0 # x is an array of 0, no warning printed
>> >>
>> >
>> > Hasn't that always been the case? Unless we have a way to raise
>> exceptions
>> > from ufuncs I don't know what else we can do.
>>
>> No, it is a consequence of errors being set to ignored in numpy.ma:
>>
>>
>> http://projects.scipy.org/gitweb?p=numpy;a=blob;f=numpy/ma/core.py;h=f28a5738efa6fb6c4cbf0b3479243b0d7286ae32;hb=master#l107
>>
>> So the fix is easy - but then it shows many (> 500) invalid values,
>> etc... related to wrong fpu handling (most of them are limited to the
>> new polynomial code, though).
>>
>>
> Umm, no. Just four, and easily fixed as I explicitly relied on the
> behaviour. After the fix and seterror(all='raise'):
>
>
To be specific, it was a true divide and I relied on nan being returned. I
expect many of the remaining failures are of the same sort.

Chuck
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/attachments/20091207/b6438995/attachment.html>