I like the idea of bumping the stacklevel in principle, but I am not sure it is all that practical. For example, if a warning came up when doing "x / y", I am assuming that it is emitted from within the ufunc np.divide(). So, you would need two stacklevels based on whether the entry point was the operator or a direct call to np.divide()? Also, I would imagine it might get weird for numpy functions called within other numpy functions. Or perhaps I am not totally understanding how this would be done?

Ben RootOn Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 5:07 PM, Ralf Gommers <ralf.gommers@gmail.com> wrote:

On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 11:02 PM, sebastian <sebastian@sipsolutions.net> wrote:Yeah, I mean you could add tests for the individual functions in principle.On 2016-01-27 21:01, Ralf Gommers wrote:

One issue will be how to keep this consistent. `stacklevel` is used so

rarely that new PRs will always omit it for new warnings. Will we just

rely on code review, or would a private wrapper around `warn` to use

inside numpy plus a test that checks that the wrapper is used

everywhere be helpful here?

I am not sure if adding an alias helps much, how are we going to test that

warnings.warn is not being used? Seems like quite a bit of voodoo necessary

for that.I was thinking something along these lines, but with a regexp checking for warnings.warn: https://github.com/scipy/scipy/blob/master/scipy/fftpack/tests/test_import.pyProbably more trouble than it's worth though.Ralf

_______________________________________________

NumPy-Discussion mailing list

NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org

https://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion