[Numpy-discussion] Set FutureWarnings to error in (dev) tests?

[Nathaniel Smith]

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 4:44 PM, Sebastian Berg
<sebastian at sipsolutions.net> wrote:
> On Do, 2016-01-21 at 16:15 -0800, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 4:05 PM, Sebastian Berg
>> <sebastian at sipsolutions.net> wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > should we try to set FutureWarnings to errors in dev tests? I am
>> > seriously annoyed by FutureWarnings getting lost all over for two
>> > reasons. First, it is hard to impossible to find even our own
>> > errors
>> > for our own FutureWarning changes. Secondly, we currently would not
>> > even see any Futurewarnings from someone else. For numpy that may
>> > not
>> > be a big issue, but still.
>>
>> Yeah, I noticed this recently too :-(. Definitely it is the right
>> thing to do, I think. And this is actually more true the more
>> annoying
>> it is, because if we're triggering lots of FutureWarnings then we
>> should fix that :-).
>>
>
> Yeah, the problem is that some FutureWarnings that are given in the
> dozens. Injecting the filter on the module level is possible, but not
> quite correct. Maybe one could do evil things similar to a "module
> decorator" to add the warning context + filter to every single function
> in a module starting with "test_".

Can we remove the FutureWarnings by making whatever change they're
warning about? :-)

> Another method could be to abuse `__warningregistry__`, but there are
> at least two reasons why this is probably not viable (nevermind that it
> would be ugly as well).
>
> Doesn't nose maybe provide *something*? I mean seriously, testing
> warnings tends to be hell broke lose? Change one thing, suddenly dozens
> appear from nowhere, never sure you found all cases, etc.

AFAICT nose doesn't provide much of anything for working with warnings. :-/

-n

-- 
Nathaniel J. Smith -- https://vorpus.org