Conversation
mdhaber
changed the title
invalid warning for np.exp(complex(np.nan, np.nan)) and such
mdhaber
marked this pull request as ready for review
September 23, 2026 00:25
This branch has not been deployed
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
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
PR summary
On some platforms,
np.expwith complex NaN input produceinvalidwarnings. Based on the behavior of other ufuncs and other precedent (e.g. gh-12236, gh-15988, gh-32602, and now gh-32706), I don't think this is desired anymore. This silences the warnings by providing an early return path.AI Disclosure
OpenAI Codex was used to inspect the relevant implementation and tests, draft
the code changes and regression tests, and prepare this AI disclosure.