Am I really still needed on this issue?

On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 7:46 PM, Hiroyuki Takagi <report@bugs.python.org>
wrote:

>
> Hiroyuki Takagi added the comment:
>
> Thank you for reviewing patch.
>
> I wrote test and updated patch. To pass the test, both this patch and
> issue25599's patch are required.
>
> Changes of the patch:
> - copy __code__ not only functions but also methods
> - add autospec (create_autospec) suppoort
>
> I have completely missed about autospec, thank you for a mention about it.
> For autospec, simply copying original __code__ to funcopy makes error on
> existing tests.
> That's why I changed the src of exec, but it seems to be quite ad-hoc. It
> may be better to be improved, but I don't have any good idea, sorry.
>
> On the tests of this patch, I wonder if it's better to use assertIs(..,
> True/False) instead of assertTrue/False, since it was one of the problem in
> issue25599.
> To apply this change and pass test, need to change
> asyncio.iscoroutinefunction to return bool. The change would be very easy,
> just update issue25599's patch like `return_value = bool(getattr(func, ...`.
>
> ----------
> Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file41664/mock2.patch
>
> _______________________________________
> Python tracker <report@bugs.python.org>
> <http://bugs.python.org/issue26140>
> _______________________________________
>