Skip to content

BUG: deallocate recursive closure in arrayprint.py (1.14 backport) #10622

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.

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

Conversation

ahaldane
Copy link
Member

Fixes #10620
Backport of #10621

@ahaldane ahaldane force-pushed the fix_arrayprint_recursive_closure_backport branch from bdb79d2 to 92c23cf Compare February 17, 2018 22:23
@charris
Copy link
Member

charris commented Feb 18, 2018

I'm going to rely on the tests here and put this in for 1.14.

@charris charris merged commit d0ba54f into numpy:maintenance/1.14.x Feb 18, 2018
@charris
Copy link
Member

charris commented Feb 18, 2018

Thanks Allan.

@charris charris added this to the 1.14.1 release milestone Feb 18, 2018
@eric-wieser
Copy link
Member

Do we want to revert this and apply the updated #10620?

@charris
Copy link
Member

charris commented Feb 19, 2018

I'm happy to go either way. If the updated version is available and better, go ahead and backport it. If it doesn't differ much, just branch off 1.14 and check it out of master and commit, that works better than cherry-picking when the merge isn't clean and is nicer than a reversion (IMHO).

@ahaldane
Copy link
Member Author

ahaldane commented Feb 19, 2018

It looks easier to me to do revert + cherry-pick, because of the messy diff in _formatArray combined with other changes in that file in master.

I think it would be nice to put in the updated patch. I'll wait until we merge that one, and then I'll submit the packport.

ahaldane added a commit to ahaldane/numpy that referenced this pull request Feb 19, 2018
…ecursive_closure_backport"

This reverts commit d0ba54f, reversing
changes made to eaac472.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants