On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 18:19, Terry J. Reedy <report@bugs.python.org> wrote:
>
> Terry J. Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> added the comment:
>
> Like Brett, I think the long term solution is to segregate
> implementation-specific tests into a separate file or subdirectory of
> files.  Then the main directory of tests could (and I would like)
> constitute an executable definition-by-example for the language.  (To
> aid this, I would also like the naming of files and tests and sequencing
> of tests within files to reflect the structure of the manual as much as
> possible -- and would help to make it so.  Separate patches of course.)
>
> Would alternative implementors prefer to wait or have a *temporary*
> addition to test_support?

Well, if the idea of breaking out the language stuff into its own
repository happens, then the tests will have to be crawled through
anyway so decorating now to act as a marker of what has to be
separated out shouldn't lead to too much extra work.

>
> If something is added, I would give it a leading underscore name and
> document it as something probably temporary for alternate
> implementations to use until a permanent solution is implemented.

Well, this might be the permanent solution. Plus the entire test
directory tends to be somewhat optional thanks to the Linux distros
leaving it out most of the time so even if it is put in there they can
just not document it.