On Wed, 6 Apr 2011 13:22:09 -0700 Brett Cannon <br...@python.org> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 12:45, Raymond Hettinger <raymond.hettin...@gmail.com > > wrote: > > > > > On Apr 6, 2011, at 10:39 AM, Brett Cannon wrote: > > > Since people are taking my "semantically identical" point too strongly > > for what I mean (there is a reason I said "except in cases > > > where implementation details of a VM prevents [semantic equivalency] > > entirely"), how about we change the requirement that C acceleration code > > must pass the same test suite (sans C specific issues such as refcount tests > > or word size) and adhere to the documented semantics the same? It should get > > us the same result without ruffling so many feathers. And if the other VMs > > find an inconsistency they can add a proper test and then we fix the code > > (as would be the case regardless). And in instances where it is simply not > > possible because of C limitations the test won't get written since the test > > will never pass. > > > > Does the whole PEP just boil down to "if a test is C specific, it should be > > marked as such"? > > > > How about the test suite needs to have 100% test coverage (or as close as > possible) on the pure Python version?
Let's say "as good coverage as the C code has", instead ;) Regards Antoine. _______________________________________________ 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
