matplotlib.tests.test_contour.test_corner_mask.test ... ok
/matplotlib/colorbar.py:539: VisibleDeprecationWarning: boolean index did not match indexed array along dimension 0; dimension is 5 but corresponding boolean dimension is 4
  colors = np.asarray(colors)[igood]
/matplotlib/colorbar.py:539: VisibleDeprecationWarning: boolean index did not match indexed array along dimension 0; dimension is 5 but corresponding boolean dimension is 3
  colors = np.asarray(colors)[igood]

Cc: @efiring: Any thoughts as a colorbar expert? I think the warning is due to a recent tightening in Numpy, but I'm not sure how to fix it.

Those may be coming out of the contouring code and I thought that @ianthomas23 fixed that.

Bit worried we may have had a bad bug-fix branch merge at somepoint that blew that away.

This has not been fixed. The problem that was fixed was the one in the
triangulation code. I think this is duplication or related to #4998

On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 4:51 PM, Thomas A Caswell notifications@github.com
wrote:

Those may be coming out of the contouring code and I thought that
@ianthomas23 https://github.com/ianthomas23 fixed that.

Bit worried we may have had a bad bug-fix branch merge at somepoint that
blew that away.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#5363 (comment)
.

I confirm that I fixed a different, but similar, problem related to numpy
tightening in the TriAnalyzer code, issue #4999, PRs #5065 and #5070. The
fix was simple, just increase the size of the boolean array to match that
of the array it is indexing.

On 30 October 2015 at 21:04, Benjamin Root notifications@github.com wrote:

This has not been fixed. The problem that was fixed was the one in the
triangulation code. I think this is duplication or related to #4998

On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 4:51 PM, Thomas A Caswell <
notifications@github.com>
wrote:

Those may be coming out of the contouring code and I thought that
@ianthomas23 https://github.com/ianthomas23 fixed that.

Bit worried we may have had a bad bug-fix branch merge at somepoint that
blew that away.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
<
#5363 (comment)

.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#5363 (comment)
.

I think this is a duplicate of #7334, and although this one is older, that one has the new name of the test and it's got some comments from @pelson who wrote the tests originally, so I'm going to close this one.