Message85848
Just to say, I'm a bit uncomfortable with a patch this large going into a
release candidate. It's all code that's been backported from 2.7, so it
*should* be okay, but I really don't want to be responsible for breaking
2.6.2.
The test failure that Skip reports *is* due to a bug, but the bug is
platform-specific (only affects x86 platforms where the math library
doesn't have isinf or isnan---in practice, that's only Solaris/x86), and
it's a bug in a somewhat obscure corner case (overflow in cmath.acosh)
that's not likely to affect many people.
I don't think the (small, I hope) risk of breaking a release candidate is
worth the (even smaller, IMO) benefit from fixing this bug. If Skip
confirms that the patch works, I'd suggest that it can wait for 2.6.3.
Assigning back to Barry for pronouncement. |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2009-04-11 10:31:57 | mark.dickinson | set | recipients:
+ mark.dickinson, skip.montanaro, barry |
2009-04-11 10:31:56 | mark.dickinson | set | messageid: <1239445916.85.0.668664043354.issue5724@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2009-04-11 10:31:55 | mark.dickinson | link | issue5724 messages |
2009-04-11 10:31:54 | mark.dickinson | create | |
|