The GD fails are a known problem but I don't know when Judd might have a chance to address them. If not by the next PDL release, we may need to revert to the 2.4.10 code.
--Chris On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 12:44 PM, David Mertens <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 8:45 AM, chm <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Thanks to the Perl Weekly, it has been reported that >> perl 5.16.0 is in the final steps of the release >> process and we need to determine any possible issues >> with PDL-2.4.10, PDL-2.4.10_003, and pdl git. >> >> Specifically, we need folks to test against the latest >> perl-5.16.0 with PDL so we can fix any bugs for a >> quick release to update PDL to fully support the >> new stable perl release. >> >> This blog entry has some thoughts for what is needed: >> http://rjbs.manxome.org/rubric/entry/1955 >> >> Please report any issues ASAP to the perldl or >> pdl-porters list and update or create any bug >> tickets needed. >> >> Thanks, >> Chris >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Perldl mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://mailman.jach.hawaii.edu/mailman/listinfo/perldl > > > Generally speaking, on *The Latest* Perl, Ricardo's 5.16 branch, and Mac OSX > 10.7 Lion, 64-bit, everything passes. But there are some caveats. > > The latest has GD issues. Oddly enough, these issues *do not* arise with > 2.4.10. > > 2.4.10 issues a handful of warnings, but all the tests pass. > > I hadn't realized that GD issues were new, and I wonder if I did things > correctly. Let me know which text you want to see, if any. > > David > > -- > "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. > Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, > by definition, not smart enough to debug it." -- Brian Kernighan > _______________________________________________ Perldl mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.jach.hawaii.edu/mailman/listinfo/perldl
