Skip to content

TST: Update unreliable num precision component of test_binary_arith_ops (GH37328) #37380

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Oct 28, 2020
Merged

TST: Update unreliable num precision component of test_binary_arith_ops (GH37328) #37380

Changes from 4 commits
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
cc04f06
TST: Update unreliable num precision component of test_binary_arith_o…
avinashpancham Oct 24, 2020
d6f3c1a
Remove tolerances to be in line with other usages of assert_almost_equal
avinashpancham Oct 26, 2020
34726c7
Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/master' into GH37328
avinashpancham Oct 26, 2020
7734999
Add background on update of tests
avinashpancham Oct 28, 2020
413de74
Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/master' into GH37328
avinashpancham Oct 28, 2020
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
7 changes: 5 additions & 2 deletions pandas/tests/computation/test_eval.py
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -298,10 +298,13 @@ def check_alignment(self, result, nlhs, ghs, op):
# TypeError, AttributeError: series or frame with scalar align
pass
else:

# direct numpy comparison
expected = self.ne.evaluate(f"nlhs {op} ghs")
tm.assert_numpy_array_equal(result.values, expected)
# Update assert statement due to unreliable numerical
# precision component (GH37328)
# TODO: update testing code so that assert_almost_equal statement
# can be replaced again by the assert_numpy_array_equal statement
tm.assert_almost_equal(result.values, expected)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

can you add a comment why we are doing this and reference to this issue

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

yah i think this makes sense, but should have a TODO indicating that it should be equality and we had to punt


# modulus, pow, and floor division require special casing

Expand Down