On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 1:29 AM, Gael Varoquaux < gael.varoqu...@normalesup.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 05:25:20PM -0600, Charles R Harris wrote: > > Well, doc tests are just a losing proposition, no one should be using > them > > for writing tests. It's not like this is a new discovery, doc tests > have > > been known to be unstable for years. > > Untested documentation is broken in my experience. This is why I do rely > a lot on doctests. > Rely as in making sure that the examples run once in a while and before a release is of course a good idea. Failures can be inspected and ignored if there are only minor differences in string representation. Relying on doctests as in "they replace the unit tests I should also have written" is another thing altogether - unnecessary and expecting an unrealistic level of backward compatibility. That of course doesn't mean things in numpy should change without a good reason, but it seems there was one. Ralf
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
