On 4/29/07, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Right. It shouldn't fail if the file is absent (it shouldn't > pass in that case, either, but regrtest has no support for INCONCLUSIVE > test outcomes).
Perhaps that could become part of the improvements made through test.test_support.TestCase? > Ok. However, this pattern is quite common in the Python test suite > (62 test cases, with prefixes such as test_, test_bug_, test_sf_, > test_bug, test_patch_), so adding it just to this single test case > may be a drop in the ocean for people unfamiliar with that convention. Very true, but maybe more tests could have the more descriptive names, then. For example, I would have known what it meant if the test name prefix was test_sf_ instead of just test_. Changing the names shouldn't interfere with anything else, so if I rename them in an effort to help the next guy, would that be accepted? > Ok! When you come up with a way to test this problem "stand-alone" > (i.e. without relying on the pagefile), please submit a patch. I'll > let this sit for some time, and if nothing happens, I go for > Khalid's patch before 2.5.2 is released (which is still months > ahead). Now that I have the full picture, I have less motivation about it. Although, I am curious what is different about the situation where pagefile.sys could not be stat'ed in 2.5.0 but other open files could. -- Read my blog! I depend on your acceptance of my opinion! I am interesting! http://ironfroggy-code.blogspot.com/ _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
