On 05/08/2013 11:55 PM, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote:
Hi Jeroen, David,Thanks for the quick feedback, and for improving doctests reports! Do you agree with the following summary of the situation: - Doctests in strings not directly attached to a class or a function definition, like those used with global options or for testing attributes are ok in principle. - Right now such doctests are ignored. However, they are detected as ignored in doctest/sources.py. And in a not so long distance they will be handled properly. Of course the reports won't be as good as if they are directly attached, but that's ok. - For a limited number of non-essential doctests, it's ok for now to write them using the nice syntax, and to just update the list of ignored tests in doctest/sources.py.
I should add that the doctest syntax you are using should work with the standard Python doctest module. That is: if whatever syntax you're using works with the Python doctesting framework, but not with Sage, then that's a bug with Sage's doctesting framework. If your syntax doesn't even work with Python's doctesting framework, then it's not our fault...
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
