[Numpy-discussion] Scipy 0.15.0 beta 1 release

[Charles R Harris]

On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 2:06 AM, Julian Taylor <
jtaylor.debian at googlemail.com> wrote:

> On 11/26/2014 12:50 AM, Andrea Gavana wrote:
> >
> > On 25 November 2014 at 19:33, David Cournapeau <cournape at gmail.com
> > <mailto:cournape at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >     On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 6:10 PM, Sturla Molden
> >     <sturla.molden at gmail.com <mailto:sturla.molden at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> >         David Cournapeau <cournape at gmail.com
> >         <mailto:cournape at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >         > Shall we consider <a
> >         > href="https://github.com/scipy/scipy/issues/4168">
> https://github.com/scipy/scipy/issues/4168</a>
> >         > to be a
> >         > blocker (the issue arises on scipy master as well as 0.14.1) ?
> >         >
> >
> >         It is really bad, but does anyone know what is really going on?
> >
> >
> >     Yes, it is in the bug report.
> >
> >
> >
> > Nice move.
> >
> > I've now recommended to hold back any upgrade/update/pip-crap/enpkg-fun
> > thing on NumPy/SciPy across the whole user base of Python in the
> > company. We will probably move to 64bit-in-any-sense soon enough, I
> > guess before this issue is solved. Tell me, NumPy, was the array aligned
> > enough in 1.8? Is NumPy stricter in its checking because of SPARC?
> SPARC?!?
>
> yes, before the change numpy accepted a factor 10 performance regression
> in complex indexing to satisfy sparc.
>
> >
> > Dozens of f2py compiled extensions are going to fail soon here - which
> > I'll reluctantly check tomorrow. I don't want to think about other
> > people on Win32 facing the same issue elsewhere... :-)
> >
>
> There haven't been any real complaints from applications yet, only
> testsuite failure of scipy.
> Either the one thing that is broken in scipy isn't much used or windows
> 32 users aren't using 1.9 yet.
> The majority of f2py should still be working, numpys own f2py testsuite
> passes on win32. I still don't know what exactly arpack is doing
> different but I also did not have time yet to look at the testcase david
> created.
>
> It should of course be fixed, I have an old branch with aligned
> allocators lying around somewhere which should fix the issue or at least
> give users a way to work around it.
>

The lesson I take from this is that we need a test ;) Also, that it would
be nice if we got more testing by users before releases. But things are as
they are, this will get fixed, and we will move on with one more lesson
learned.

If anyone is to blame, it is the reviewer, namely, myself.

Chuck
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/attachments/20141126/3377f921/attachment.html>