Message 258558 - Python tracker

➜

This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author	superluser
Recipients	ezio.melotti, michael.foord, rbcollins, sleepycal, superluser
Date	2016-01-18.22:58:18
SpamBayes Score	-1.0
Marked as misclassified	Yes
Message-id	<1453157898.99.0.252814661588.issue24922@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to

Content
Would this mean that we expect any one of the warnings to be raised, or all of them? If it's one, the example you give would be equivalent to: self.assertWarnsRegex(UserWarning, "^W100[01]") Matching all of the warnings seems more interesting, but I'm not sure how to handle the context manager attributes. For instance, right now you can do: with self.assertWarnsRegex(FooWarning, "Bar") as cm: blah() self.assertEquals(cm.lineno, 1000) Would lineno and filename become lists? It seems kind of ugly. What's the advantage over simply testing for each warning separately?

Would this mean that we expect any one of the warnings to be raised, or all of them?  If it's one, the example you give would be equivalent to:

    self.assertWarnsRegex(UserWarning, "^W100[01]")

Matching all of the warnings seems more interesting, but I'm not sure how to handle the context manager attributes.  For instance, right now you can do:

    with self.assertWarnsRegex(FooWarning, "Bar") as cm:
        blah()
    self.assertEquals(cm.lineno, 1000)

Would lineno and filename become lists?  It seems kind of ugly.  What's the advantage over simply testing for each warning separately?

History
Date	User	Action	Args
2016-01-18 22:58:19	superluser	set	recipients: + superluser, rbcollins, ezio.melotti, michael.foord, sleepycal
2016-01-18 22:58:18	superluser	set	messageid: <1453157898.99.0.252814661588.issue24922@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2016-01-18 22:58:18	superluser	link	issue24922 messages
2016-01-18 22:58:18	superluser	create