Brett Cannon added the comment:
Since http://bugs.python.org/issue10967 is the meta issue for updating regrtest
this can be closed.
--
resolution: - fixed
status: open - closed
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
Chris Jerdonek added the comment:
Since regrtest is now using argparse (as of 6e2e5adc0400), is there a reason to
keep this issue open? Or should the issue be retitled (current title: Move
test.regrtest from getopt to argparse)? There seem to be some thoughts in the
comments that are
Chris Jerdonek added the comment:
I just discovered that issue 15302, which has a patch awaiting review from a
month ago as well as some discussion, is a duplicate of this issue.
Would it be possible to leave that issue open (retitling either or both issues
if necessary to avoid overlap)?
Changes by Tshepang Lekhonkhobe tshep...@gmail.com:
--
nosy: +tshepang
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue10848
___
___
Changes by Sandro Tosi sandro.t...@gmail.com:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file20541/issue10848-testdir-py3k.patch
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue10848
___
Sandro Tosi sandro.t...@gmail.com added the comment:
I've created two new issues (David, I think I've lost why I'd need 3 :) )
* issue11030 - finally allows to specify a relative dir with --coverdir
* issue11031 - to expose --testdir in order to specify a different location of
the directory
R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com added the comment:
I would say so, otherwise how are you going to run the tests you write :)
As for the other issue...I hadn't counted one for --testdir, but making that a
new issue was a good idea. So the other two I had in mind was for STDTESTS and
Sandro Tosi sandro.t...@gmail.com added the comment:
As suggested by David, I made it possible to specify an alternative test
directory by introducing '--testdir DIR' cli option: attached the patch,
comments are welcome :)
What about STDTESTS/NOTTESTS in case --testdir is specified? Currently
Sandro Tosi sandro.t...@gmail.com added the comment:
shouldn't we use the same method also for --coverdir (that currently faild the
least surprise test when specifying a relative path) replacing
coverdir = os.path.join(os.getcwd(), a)
with
coverdir = os.path.join(support.SAVEDCWD, a)
?
R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com added the comment:
I would open three new bugs to address the issues you raise. It ought to be
possible to rename things so that we can eliminate the pre-population of
NOTTESTS (if not I'd like to know why not!). STDTESTS appear to move certain
tests to
Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com added the comment:
As I recall, STDTESTS is there to check we have a basically functioning
interpreter (i.e. the compiler works, etc). The idea is that if any of those
fail, everything else is likely to go belly up as well. If regrtest is being
used to run some
Sandro Tosi sandro.t...@gmail.com added the comment:
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 02:20, R. David Murray rep...@bugs.python.org wrote:
That might be handy. I thought you were trying to roughly reproduce the
current help (which dumps it all out at once), which is why I suggested
epilog.
R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com added the comment:
Hmm. Am I misunderstanding something about epilog, then? I thought it was
placed at the end of the other help text?
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
Sandro Tosi sandro.t...@gmail.com added the comment:
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 19:29, R. David Murray rep...@bugs.python.org wrote:
R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com added the comment:
Hmm. Am I misunderstanding something about epilog, then? I thought it was
placed at the end of the
Raymond Hettinger rhettin...@users.sourceforge.net added the comment:
ISTM that moving from argument parser to another is more likely to introduce
bugs than to solve them. There may be other advantages, but reducing bugginess
isn't one of them. Lots of scripts have used getopts successfully.
Brett Cannon br...@python.org added the comment:
If Sandro is willing to write test for regrtest as part of the move then that
would be a complete net win from the current situation.
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
Raymond Hettinger rhettin...@users.sourceforge.net added the comment:
+1
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue10848
___
___
Sandro Tosi sandro.t...@gmail.com added the comment:
Sure, that would be really interesting to do, and I do commit to write
a test suite to the tool that runs the python test suite :)
What I'm asking is: how would you do that? I'm quite new as
contributor so the ideas of experienced core devs
Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org added the comment:
Some parts of regrtest have been obsoleted by changes in unittest. Best not to
write tests for something that will go.
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue10848
R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com added the comment:
I would say writing tests for regrtest is going to be a somewhat tricky task.
I think you will have to do some code tweaking to even be able to run certain
tests. I believe that regrtest currently has some built in assumptions about
Sandro Tosi sandro.t...@gmail.com added the comment:
I finally had the time to look more closely to the issue, and I'd like to hear
some comments on the info visualization.
Currently we have --help option to print:
usage + additional details about execution + more rigorous testing
options
R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com added the comment:
What about putting the addition option details in the epilog?
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue10848
___
Sandro Tosi sandro.t...@gmail.com added the comment:
R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com added the comment:
What about putting the addition option details in the epilog?
maybe it loose the fact that all the doc/explanation for regrtest
options were available from the command-line?
what
R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com added the comment:
That might be handy. I thought you were trying to roughly reproduce the
current help (which dumps it all out at once), which is why I suggested epilog.
--
___
Python tracker
Changes by Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org:
--
keywords: -easy
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue10848
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing
Sandro Tosi sandro.t...@gmail.com added the comment:
R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com added the comment:
Note that based on my experience with the conversion of compileall to
argparse,it is important to have good tests. Of course, regrtest itself has
no tests...
Indeed that's quite
R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com added the comment:
Testing regrtest is distinctly non-trivial, since options have interactions
(some of the somewhat unobvious). Ideally we'd refactor the code so that we
could point it at a test test-directory so we could write some automated tests
for
R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com added the comment:
Note that it is also possible that after doing a review of the functionality,
there might be consensus to drop one or more options, which would be a good
thing overall, IMO.
--
___
Python
New submission from Brett Cannon br...@python.org:
r87812 shows that using getopt is not a good thing; having the short and long
versions of an argument separated from each other can lead to bugs. It would be
good to move test.regrtest over to argparse to help prevent that from happening
Sandro Tosi sandro.t...@gmail.com added the comment:
I had that in mind since quite some time, so I'm taking ownership of this issue.
--
assignee: - sandro.tosi
nosy: +sandro.tosi
versions: +Python 3.3
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com added the comment:
Note that based on my experience with the conversion of compileall to
argparse,it is important to have good tests. Of course, regrtest itself has no
tests...
--
nosy: +r.david.murray
___
Changes by Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org:
--
nosy: +eric.araujo
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue10848
___
___
Python-bugs-list
32 matches
Mail list logo
