[MRG+1] FIX common test failures on Windows#9115
Merged
jnothman merged 5 commits intoscikit-learn:masterfrom Jun 14, 2017
Merged
[MRG+1] FIX common test failures on Windows#9115jnothman merged 5 commits intoscikit-learn:masterfrom
jnothman merged 5 commits intoscikit-learn:masterfrom
Conversation
Common tests require some absolute tolerance in array comparison for small numerical imprecisions
Member
Author
|
The relevant tests are no longer failing. This is ready for review. |
Member
|
LGTM |
lesteve
reviewed
Jun 14, 2017
|
|
||
|
|
||
| def assert_allclose_dense_sparse(x, y, rtol=1e-07, atol=0, err_msg=''): | ||
| def assert_allclose_dense_sparse(x, y, rtol=1e-07, atol=1e-9, err_msg=''): |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actually should we keep the same default as np.assert_allclose i.e. atol=0 and just use atol != 0 in the tests that need it?
Member
Author
|
i think any test is susceptible to this level of absolute error
…On 14 Jun 2017 6:45 pm, "Loïc Estève" ***@***.***> wrote:
LGTM
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#9115 (comment)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAEz64XAZ0ra6R61EhNhWOr31huNFhW7ks5sD5xugaJpZM4N4Y8t>
.
|
Member
|
I pushed the change of threshold to 0.87 as mentioned in #9111 (comment). The tests should pass on AppVeyor. |
Member
Author
|
I'm happy with this, but I'd like to seek @amueller's input, or someone else's. |
Member
Member
Author
|
That sounds more than fine. I was about to say that we could merge in any case so that people can get green ticks and get feedback after the fact. :) |
Member
|
thanks :) Sorry, have been trying to catch up with work after getting back. |
dmohns
pushed a commit
to dmohns/scikit-learn
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 7, 2017
dmohns
pushed a commit
to dmohns/scikit-learn
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 7, 2017
NelleV
pushed a commit
to NelleV/scikit-learn
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 11, 2017
paulha
pushed a commit
to paulha/scikit-learn
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 19, 2017
AishwaryaRK
pushed a commit
to AishwaryaRK/scikit-learn
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 29, 2017
maskani-moh
pushed a commit
to maskani-moh/scikit-learn
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 15, 2017
jwjohnson314
pushed a commit
to jwjohnson314/scikit-learn
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 18, 2017
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Common tests require some absolute tolerance in array comparison for small numerical imprecisions
Partially fixes #9111.
Is 1e-9 sufficiently small? (Is it sufficiently large for AppVeyor to pass??? We'll see soon.)