Albert Steppi

The failure is related ``` .................. [ 80%] scipy/special/tests/test_support_alternative_backends.py .FFF.FFF.FFF.FF [ 80%] F.FFF.FFF.FFF.FFF.FFF................................................... [ 81%] ........................................................................ [ 81%] ........................................................................ [ 81%] ........................................................................ [ 81%] ........................................................................ [ 81%] ........................................................................ [ 81%]...

OK, I think that should take care of the remaining test failures.

Oh, ~looks like `test_public_api.py` needs to be updated for how I handled giving alternative backend support for the alias `digamma` for `psi`~, the `digamma` alias still needs to be importable...

It looks like the weird memory error on 32 bit Linux still happens even after everything else is fixed. I'll see if I can reproduce in a 32 bit Linux...

Thanks @dcherian for moving this to the right place! I'd be happy to answer any questions anyone has.

Thanks for the questions @max-sixty! Yes, the plan is just to have the front page translated not the full docs. Regarding, keeping things updated, in the [FAQ](https://scientific-python-translations.github.io/faq/#what-are-the-plans-for-keeping-translations-up-to-date), I wrote *Limiting...

> Thanks @steppi ! That sounds good. (I realize you added a link to the FAQ, sorry for having missed that...) Great to hear! No worries about missing the FAQ...

I think we're getting close to the point where support for alternative backends will no longer be hidden behind `SCIPY_ARRAY_API=1`. It seems like a proper time to take action on...

> Thanks @steppi, I am interested in improving Pade approximants in SciPy, see #20064 and [my recent mailing list post](https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/thread/3CBCZJCRLUZLHF2ZSV4XWUL2S3XEMOOY/). I was planning on implementing the method described in Trefethen...

> I think we should also consider the testing mechanisms we have. There is no transparency in what is being tested and with what data points. Yeah, agreed. It wasn't...