Skip to content

🟠 Test failure on master #5444

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

Closed
max-sixty opened this issue Jun 6, 2021 · 1 comment · Fixed by #5449
Closed

🟠 Test failure on master #5444

max-sixty opened this issue Jun 6, 2021 · 1 comment · Fixed by #5449

Comments

@max-sixty
Copy link
Collaborator

What happened:

We have a failure related to a dask release, I think. Here's a job that failed: https://github.com/pydata/xarray/pull/5365/checks?check_run_id=2757459587

It's the test: xarray/tests/test_computation.py::test_vectorize_dask_dtype_meta


        References
        ----------
        .. [1] https://docs.scipy.org/doc/numpy/reference/ufuncs.html
        .. [2] https://docs.scipy.org/doc/numpy/reference/c-api/generalized-ufuncs.html
        """
        # Input processing:
        ## Signature
        if not isinstance(signature, str):
            raise TypeError("`signature` has to be of type string")
        input_coredimss, output_coredimss = _parse_gufunc_signature(signature)
    
        ## Determine nout: nout = None for functions of one direct return; nout = int for return tuples
        nout = None if not isinstance(output_coredimss, list) else len(output_coredimss)
    
        ## Consolidate onto `meta`
        if meta is not None and output_dtypes is not None:
>           raise ValueError(
                "Only one of `meta` and `output_dtypes` should be given (`meta` is preferred)."
            )
E           ValueError: Only one of `meta` and `output_dtypes` should be given (`meta` is preferred).

Should we xfail this? Does anyone have thoughts for a quick fix?

@keewis
Copy link
Collaborator

keewis commented Jun 6, 2021

this is part of #5366, but nobody noticed since there are a few others we also have to fix. Let's keep this one open as a dedicated issue, though.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants