Message134965
> I think that the patch is simple (it adds 3 "with+simplefilter") and it
> doesn't add "complexity", or you should define what complexity is :-)
The patch is indeed quite simple. but with it half of the code in _baseAssertEqual will be to deal with warnings for this corner case.
> Buildbots use "make buildbottest" which run python with -bb
Yes, but "make buildbottest" is used just by the buildbots afaik.
> No. You have usually more failures with -bb than without any -b flag.
> Not in test itself, but in a function called by the test.
That's what I meant, the tests will still work with -bb and the failures will be elsewhere (i.e. the patch won't change anything here).
> A test may only fail with -bb.
If the failure is in the test, I would say that the test is probably wrong (see e.g. the assertNotEqual example in my previous message), if the failure is elsewhere the patch won't change anything.
> Anyway, my problem is to be able to get more informations on a
> failure in a buildbot. I cannot change (easily) -bb flags on the
> buildbots [...]
On this I agree (that's why I'm -0.5 and not -1), but as I said it's a very specific situation, and my gut feeling is that it might not be worth fixing it. |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2011-05-02 12:38:18 | ezio.melotti | set | recipients:
+ ezio.melotti, vstinner, eric.araujo, michael.foord |
2011-05-02 12:38:18 | ezio.melotti | set | messageid: <1304339898.67.0.459891477613.issue11887@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2011-05-02 12:38:17 | ezio.melotti | link | issue11887 messages |
2011-05-02 12:38:17 | ezio.melotti | create | |
|