Hi, On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Julian Taylor <jtaylor.deb...@googlemail.com> wrote: > hi, > as numpy 1.9 is going to be a relative hard upgrade as indexing changes > expose a couple bugs in third party packages and the large amount of > small little incompatibilities I will create a numpy 1.8.2 release > tomorrow with a couple of important or hard to work around bugfixes. > > The most important bugfix is fixing the wrong result partition with > multiple selections could produce if selections ended up in an equal > range, see https://github.com/numpy/numpy/issues/4836 (if the crash is > still unreproducable, help appreciated). > > the rest of the fixes are small ones listed below. > If I have missed one or you consider one of the fixes to invasive for a > bugfix release please speak up now. > As the number of fixes is small I will skip a release candidate. > > > Make fftpack._raw_fft threadsafe > https://github.com/numpy/numpy/issues/4656 > > Prevent division by zero > https://github.com/numpy/numpy/issues/650 > > Fix lack of NULL check in array_richcompare > https://github.com/numpy/numpy/issues/4613 > > incorrect argument order to _copyto in in np.nanmax, np.nanmin > https://github.com/numpy/numpy/issues/4628 > > Hold GIL for types with fields, fixes > https://github.com/numpy/numpy/issues/4642 > > svd ufunc typo > https://github.com/numpy/numpy/issues/4733 > > check alignment of strides for byteswap > https://github.com/numpy/numpy/issues/4774 > > add missing elementsize alignment check for simd reductions > https://github.com/numpy/numpy/issues/4853 > > ifort has issues with optimization flag /O2 > https://github.com/numpy/numpy/issues/4602
Any chance of a RC to give us some time to test? Cheers, Matthew _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
