Opened 10 years ago
Closed 8 years ago
#13297 closed enhancement (fixed)
Fix broken rst2sws and add doctests for the scripts rst2txt and rst2sws
Reported by: | slabbe | Owned by: | slabbe |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | major | Milestone: | sage-6.4 |
Component: | doctest coverage | Keywords: | |
Cc: | Merged in: | ||
Authors: | Sébastien Labbé | Reviewers: | Clemens Heuberger |
Report Upstream: | N/A | Work issues: | |
Branch: | 8e9cbb3 (Commits, GitHub, GitLab) | Commit: | 8e9cbb354eb3ec727628250b1d378bddc0e78f0e |
Dependencies: | Stopgaps: |
Description (last modified by )
Change History (16)
comment:1 Changed 9 years ago by
- Milestone changed from sage-5.11 to sage-5.12
comment:2 Changed 9 years ago by
- Milestone changed from sage-6.1 to sage-6.2
comment:3 Changed 8 years ago by
- Milestone changed from sage-6.2 to sage-6.3
comment:4 Changed 8 years ago by
- Milestone changed from sage-6.3 to sage-6.4
comment:5 Changed 8 years ago by
- Branch set to u/slabbe/13297
- Commit set to 242f03b0a55224e8b0ca3a3fa9f6f9173907fd20
- Status changed from new to needs_review
comment:6 Changed 8 years ago by
Ah! Maybe we can also use this to test other scripts of this nature... see #17377.
Just a comment (I don't have time immediately to try this): What of sage --rst2txt
- is that eventually a new way? I think that is now supported, anyway, maybe should put that instead for consistency's sake (not that I care, I know others do).
comment:7 Changed 8 years ago by
comment:8 Changed 8 years ago by
Would it be feasible to check that the output of -rst2sws
does what it should, e.g. using the python tarfile
module to extract sage_worksheet/worksheet.html
and check its content?
comment:9 Changed 8 years ago by
I think that should be pretty reasonable, as long as one uses temp files throughout.
comment:10 Changed 8 years ago by
- Commit changed from 242f03b0a55224e8b0ca3a3fa9f6f9173907fd20 to 8e9cbb354eb3ec727628250b1d378bddc0e78f0e
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
8e9cbb3 | Trac #13297: Adding and fixing tests for rst2txt and rst2sws
|
comment:11 Changed 8 years ago by
Thanks for your comments, I fix them accordingly. I also added more tests.
comment:12 Changed 8 years ago by
- Description modified (diff)
- Summary changed from Add doctests for the scripts rst2txt and rst2sws to Fix broken rst2sws and add doctests for the scripts rst2txt and rst2sws
comment:13 Changed 8 years ago by
- Reviewers set to Clemens Heuberger
The new tests seem to be reasonable. Doctests pass. The .sws
file generated in the test can be imported into the sage worksheet, so it seems to be ok. I manually checked ./sage -docbuild file=src/sage/tests/cmdline.py html
to check that no new ReSt
errors are introduced by this ticket (the list at the top is rendered messily, but that's not this ticket's fault).
For me, this is a positive review. I do not yet press the button in order to give Karl-Dieter or others still a possibility to comment.
comment:14 Changed 8 years ago by
Nono, looks fine to me too but I don't have time to test and think about it, so feel free!
comment:15 Changed 8 years ago by
- Status changed from needs_review to positive_review
comment:16 Changed 8 years ago by
- Branch changed from u/slabbe/13297 to 8e9cbb354eb3ec727628250b1d378bddc0e78f0e
- Resolution set to fixed
- Status changed from positive_review to closed
Motivated by the (second) issue found in #17371, I finally wrote doctests for cmdline rst2txt and rst2sws.
Needs review!
New commits:
Trac #13297: Basic cmd line tests for rst2txt and rst2sws