Opened 10 years ago
Last modified 10 years ago
#12336 closed defect
The optional doctests in sage/databases/symbolic_data.py are misformatted so they are never run — at Version 9
Reported by: | was | Owned by: | mvngu |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | minor | Milestone: | sage-5.0 |
Component: | doctest coverage | Keywords: | |
Cc: | mjo | Merged in: | |
Authors: | Martin Albrecht | Reviewers: | Michael Orlitzky |
Report Upstream: | N/A | Work issues: | |
Branch: | Commit: | ||
Dependencies: | Stopgaps: |
Description (last modified by )
The format for optional tests is:
sage: the_test # optional - package_or_other_name
But in databases/symbolic_data.py, we find
sage: search_src('optional', 'database_symbo') databases/symbolic_data.py:33: sage: sd = SymbolicData(); sd # optional requires database_symbolic_data databases/symbolic_data.py:36: sage: sd.ZeroDim__example_1 # optional requires database_symbolic_data databases/symbolic_data.py:39: sage: sd.Katsura_3 # optional requires database_symbolic_data ...
Using "requires" doesn't work, though you can optional put that after the dash.
Change History (11)
Changed 10 years ago by
comment:1 Changed 10 years ago by
- Cc mjo added
- Status changed from new to needs_review
All optional doctests in symbolic_data.py:
$ sage -t -verbose -only-optional symbolic_data.py ... 31 passed and 0 failed.
Before the patch:
$ sage -t -verbose -only-optional=database_symbolic_data symbolic_data.py sage -t -verbose -only-optional=database_symbolic_data "devel/sage-devel/sage/databases/symbolic_data.py" [0.1 s] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- All tests passed! Total time for all tests: 0.1 seconds
And after the patch,
$ sage -t -verbose -only-optional=database_symbolic_data symbolic_data.py ... 31 passed and 0 failed.
comment:2 Changed 10 years ago by
Ah, crap. I completely missed that there was a patch up already, so I prepared my own. Sorry. But to sweeten the deal: I fixed the format of the docs so that they work with sphinx and added the docs to the reference manual.
comment:3 follow-up: ↓ 4 Changed 10 years ago by
mjo: can you referee malb's patch? (or conversely -- I'm confused.)
comment:4 in reply to: ↑ 3 Changed 10 years ago by
Replying to was:
mjo: can you referee malb's patch? (or conversely -- I'm confused.)
His is the better patch.
It's annoying for me to review documentation from home thanks to #12276 (I have to rebuild a chunk of my system or the HTML looks like hell), but I can do it tonight. I've got to build beta2 anyway.
comment:5 Changed 10 years ago by
I know this is silly, but since the patch touches them all, can you change EXAMPLE to EXAMPLES? At least for the one with multiple examples (I prefer them to be consistent, but don't care all that much).
Other than that, the patch is fine and the new docs look great.
comment:6 Changed 10 years ago by
- Reviewers set to Michael Orlitzky
- Status changed from needs_review to needs_work
- Work issues set to EXAMPLE -> EXAMPLES in headings
Changed 10 years ago by
comment:8 Changed 10 years ago by
- Status changed from needs_review to positive_review
- Work issues EXAMPLE -> EXAMPLES in headings deleted
Today I learned that you can start a commit message with the comment delimiter. Thanks!
Fix optional syntax in symbolic_data.py