Shouldn't test(all=1) be the default?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
2 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Shouldn't test(all=1) be the default?

Charles R Harris
Several problems would have been caught early on if test(all=1) had been the default. Is there a reason it is not so?

Chuck

_______________________________________________
Numpy-discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Shouldn't test(all=1) be the default?

Robert Kern-2
On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 5:49 PM, Charles R Harris
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> Several problems would have been caught early on if test(all=1) had been the
> default. Is there a reason it is not so?

This dates back a long ways. Presumably, important tests were to be
associated with module names, and extra tests (like benchmarks)
weren't. But I really don't know the entire thinking behind it. We
should probably turn it to True for the rest of the 1.1.y series.

Anyways, all of this is getting replaced in 1.2 and is already gone in
scipy; the practice of naming test files like the modules they test
won't be required anymore.

--
Robert Kern

"I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless
enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as
though it had an underlying truth."
 -- Umberto Eco
_______________________________________________
Numpy-discussion mailing list
[hidden email]
http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion