Author ncoghlan
Recipients barry, benjamin.peterson, brett.cannon, exarkun, ncoghlan, pitrou
Date 2008-09-09.14:53:19
SpamBayes Score 0.000110459
Marked as misclassified No
Message-id <1220972001.05.0.834079710074.issue3781@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
In working on the reversion patch, I just noticed that r66321 also
incorrectly removed a whole pile of w.reset() calls.

When using a single catch_warning() context to test two or more
operations which may raise the same warning, you *must* call w.reset()
between each operation, or the later operations can fail to raise
warnings, but the test will still pass because the most recent warning
is still one which was correctly raised by an earlier operation.
History
Date User Action Args
2008-09-09 14:53:21ncoghlansetrecipients: + ncoghlan, barry, brett.cannon, exarkun, pitrou, benjamin.peterson
2008-09-09 14:53:21ncoghlansetmessageid: <1220972001.05.0.834079710074.issue3781@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2008-09-09 14:53:20ncoghlanlinkissue3781 messages
2008-09-09 14:53:19ncoghlancreate