R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com added the comment:
Please implement name+argtuple first and build auto-naming on top of that.
Nick's approach would not allow me to specify a custom (hand coded) name for
each set of arguments, which is my normal use case. I also would not like the
Changes by R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com:
--
Removed message: http://bugs.python.org/msg140810
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue7879
___
Alexander Belopolsky belopol...@users.sourceforge.net added the comment:
- 26backport committed in r81618.
- merged to release31-maint in r81619.
The skipIf patch blocked from release26-maint (skipIf is new in 2.7) and merged
into release31-maint in r81620.
--
stage: commit review -
Mark Dickinson dicki...@gmail.com added the comment:
This looks fine to me. Alexander?
--
nosy: +belopolsky, mark.dickinson
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue7879
___
Changes by Alexander Belopolsky belopol...@users.sourceforge.net:
--
assignee: - belopolsky
stage: - commit review
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue7879
___
Alexander Belopolsky belopol...@users.sourceforge.net added the comment:
Mark,
I have zero experience with Windows and don't even have a win32 machine to test
the patch.
On the other hand the patch is so simple that I think it can be reviewed based
on theoretical considerations.
This is
Brian Curtin cur...@acm.org added the comment:
sys.platform will be win32 for both 32 and 64-bit Windows.
As for Cygwin, os.name is posix there, and sys.platform is cygwin, so it
should be unaffected.
The patch looks fine to me, and we do typically use sys.platform more often
than the
Alexander Belopolsky belopol...@users.sourceforge.net added the comment:
OK, I'll commit it then.
--
resolution: - accepted
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue7879
___
Alexander Belopolsky belopol...@users.sourceforge.net added the comment:
Committed in r81555 (trunk) and r81556 (py3k). Is this a 2.6 backport
candidate? I don't think so.
Leaving this open to consider using newer unittest.skipIf mechanism. See
attached patch, issue7879.diff.
--
Mark Dickinson dicki...@gmail.com added the comment:
The skipIf patch looks good to me (though I haven't tested it).
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue7879
___
Alexander Belopolsky belopol...@users.sourceforge.net added the comment:
From IRC:
Taggnostr: imho tests and doc updates can be backported
--
keywords: +26backport
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue7879
Changes by Alexander Belopolsky belopol...@users.sourceforge.net:
--
versions: +Python 2.6, Python 3.1, Python 3.2
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue7879
___
Alexander Belopolsky belopol...@users.sourceforge.net added the comment:
SkipIf patch committed in r81559 (trunk) and r81560 (py3k).
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue7879
___
Changes by Andrej Krpic akrpi...@gmail.com:
--
components: +Windows
type: - behavior
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue7879
___
___
New submission from Andrej Krpic akrpi...@gmail.com:
Windows doesn't accept negative timestamps (stated in the comment), yet checks
is made against os.name instead of sys.platform.
patch fixes that, and also enables windows ce to pass on this test.
I think this is better than having os.name
15 matches
Mail list logo
