A RetroSearch Logo

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Search Query:

Showing content from http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2001-February/012438.html below:

[Python-Dev] any opinion on 'make quicktest'?

[Python-Dev] any opinion on 'make quicktest'? [Python-Dev] any opinion on 'make quicktest'?Jeremy Hylton jeremy@alum.mit.edu
Thu, 1 Feb 2001 14:58:29 -0500 (EST)
>>>>> "FLD" == Fred L Drake, <fdrake@acm.org> writes:

  >> + QUICKTESTOPTS= $(TESTOPTS) -x test_thread test_signal
  >>   test_strftime \
  >> + test_unicodedata test_re test_sre test_select test_poll
  >> + quicktest: all platform
  >> + -rm -f $(srcdir)/Lib/test/*.py[co]
  >> + -PYTHONPATH= $(TESTPYTHON) $(TESTPROG) $(QUICKTESTOPTS)
  >> + PYTHONPATH= $(TESTPYTHON) $(TESTPROG) $(QUICKTESTOPTS)

  FLD> In fact, for this, I'd only run the test once and would skip the
  FLD> "rm" command as well.  I usually just run the regression test
  FLD> once (but with all modules, to avoid the extra typing).

Actually, I think the rm is important.  I've spent most of the last
month running make test to check the compiler.

Jeremy



RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue

Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo

HTML: 3.2 | Encoding: UTF-8 | Version: 0.7.4