[Numpy-discussion] Backwards-incompatible improvements to numpy.random.RandomState

josef.pktd at gmail.com josef.pktd at gmail.com
Sun May 24 11:04:11 EDT 2015

On Sun, May 24, 2015 at 9:08 AM, Alan G Isaac <alan.isaac at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 5/24/2015 8:47 AM, Ralf Gommers wrote:
> > Values only change if you leave out the call to seed()
> OK, but this claim seems to conflict with the following language:
> "the global RandomState object should use the latest implementation of the
> methods".
> I take it that this is what Nathan meant by
> "I think this is just a bug in the description of the proposal here, not
> in the proposal itself".
> So, is the correct phrasing
> "the global RandomState object should use the latest implementation of the
> methods, unless explicitly seeded"?

that's how I understand it.

I don't see any problems with the clarified proposal for the use cases that
I know of.

Can we choose the version also for the global random state, for example to
fix both version and seed in unit tests, with version > 0?

BTW: I would expect that bug fixes are still exempt from backwards

fixing #5851 should be independent of the version, (without having looked
at the issue)

(If you need to replicate bugs, then use an old version of a package.)


> Thanks,
> Alan
> _______________________________________________
> NumPy-Discussion mailing list
> NumPy-Discussion at scipy.org
> http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/attachments/20150524/2fccedd0/attachment.html>

More information about the NumPy-Discussion mailing list