#14575 closed enhancement (fixed)
Improve ./sage -t --new
| Reported by: | jdemeyer | Owned by: | roed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Priority: | minor | Milestone: | sage-5.10 |
| Component: | doctest framework | Keywords: | |
| Cc: | roed | Merged in: | sage-5.10.rc0 |
| Authors: | Jeroen Demeyer | Reviewers: | David Roe |
| Report Upstream: | N/A | Work issues: | |
| Branch: | Commit: | ||
| Dependencies: | Stopgaps: |
Description
- The filenames should be filtered:
./sage -t --newshouldn't test files which normally should't be tested (non-Python files or "nodoctest" files).
- It would be cool if Mercurial queue was supported: test all files changed in the patch on top of the queue.
Attachments (1)
Change History (8)
comment:1 Changed 8 years ago by
- Status changed from new to needs_review
Changed 8 years ago by
comment:2 Changed 8 years ago by
- Cc roed added
comment:3 Changed 8 years ago by
- Reviewers set to David Roe
- Status changed from needs_review to positive_review
There are some weird plugin failures, but I don't think they're actually valid (it says there's a problem with doctest continuations and with building the documentation....)
I'm happy to give it a positive review.
comment:4 Changed 8 years ago by
- Merged in set to sage-5.10.rc0
- Resolution set to fixed
- Status changed from positive_review to closed
comment:5 Changed 11 months ago by
Sorry for raising a dead ticket. Was there any special reason it had to be named nodoctest.py and by that I mean specifically the .py part. Was the idea that it could contain real python code? Any objection if I was removing or changing the extension?
comment:6 Changed 11 months ago by
I don't think there was any particular reason for the .py extension, and I have no objection if you want to change it.
comment:7 Changed 11 months ago by
Thanks. Any suggestion for an extension?
At the moment those files when they exists have to be manually installed on distros - their folder usually don't have an __init__.py so they are not picked up by distutils unless you add them to package_data. In turn, they are not automatically byte-compiled which triggers QA warnings. And when you look at the file themselves, they are not real python files in the first place so the byte-compiling is not useful.
David, do you feel like reviewing this one?