RetroSearch Browse

Mon Dec 22 15:35:25 CET 2008 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-December/084523.html

Martin> It seems r67740 shouldn't have been committed. Since this is a
    Martin> severe regression, I think I'll have to revert it, and release
    Martin> 2.5.4 with just that change.

    Martin> Unless I hear otherwise, I would release Python 2.5.4 (without a
    Martin> release candidate) tomorrow.

I don't think there is a test case which fails with it applied and passes
with it removed.  If not, I think it might be worthwhile to write such a
test even if it's used temporarily just to test the change.  I wrote a
trivial test case:

Index: Lib/test/test_file.py
===================================================================

--- Lib/test/test_file.py       (revision 67899)
+++ Lib/test/test_file.py       (working copy)
@@ -116,6 +116,8 @@
         except:
             self.assertEquals(self.f.__exit__(*sys.exc_info()), None)

+    def testReadWhenWriting(self):
+        self.assertRaises(IOError, self.f.read)

 class OtherFileTests(unittest.TestCase):

which segfaults (on Solaris 10 at least) when run with the 2.5.3 released
code and which passes after I undo r67740.

Should we add this to the active branches (2.6, trunk, py3k, 3.0)?

Skip



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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-December/084523.html below:

[Python-Dev] Releasing 2.5.4