On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 2:41 PM, Simon King <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Robert, > > On 2012-08-31, Robert Bradshaw <[email protected]> wrote: >>> The point is that my patch doesn't touch misc/cachefunc.pyx. >> >> I see that you have 5 dependencies; perhaps one of them does? > > The plugin compares sage-5.3.rc0 with sage-5.3.rc0+#13370. Two of the five > dependencies of the ticket are already part of sage-5.3.rc0. With the > dependencies of the dependencies, we have to consider #715, #11521, > #12215 and #12313. > > #715 doesn't touch misc/cachefunc.pyx. Neither does #11521 or #12313. > > #12215 introduces a new class in nisc/cachefunc. Both the class itself and its > methods `__init__`, `__call__`, `is_in_cache` and `set_cache` are > tested. I could imagine, though, that the plugin does not recognise all > of the tests: The class is called WeakCachedFunction, but it gives rise > to a decorator called weak_cached_function.
#12215 looks like the culprit: http://patchbot.sagemath.org/log/12215/Fedora/17/x86_64/3.5.2-3.fc17.x86_64/volker-desktop.stp.dias.ie/2012-08-27%2012:34:42%20+0100?plugin=plugins.coverage&diff=/log/0/Fedora/17/x86_64/3.5.2-3.fc17.x86_64/volker-desktop.stp.dias.ie/2012-08-25%2018%3A55%3A21%20%2B0100&ticket=12215&base=5.3.rc0 which boils down to a broken sage -coverageall . File a ticket! :-) - Robert -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel?hl=en.
