RetroSearch Browse

Fri Jun 27 13:00:35 CEST 2008 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-June/080770.html

Benjamin Peterson wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 10:34 AM, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 8:32 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I'm personally fine with that approach, but some of the new items in there
>>> for 2.6 could probably use a bit of cleaning up to improve the APIs and/or
>>> the way they work.
>> So get crackin'!
> 
> I'll add to my list. :)
> 
> Anyway, if we are going to make test.support public for real why don't
> we take Nick's suggestion to rename the test package to _test, but
> move test.support to a toplevel position like testutils or such.

Leaving the actual test modules undocumented (which is the situation 
now) is fine in my opinion. The _test idea was just for if we wanted to 
document test_support for our own benefit without promising to keep it 
stable for later releases.

Cheers,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan at gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia
---------------------------------------------------------------
             http://www.boredomandlaziness.org

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-June/080770.html below:

[Python-Dev] Undocumenting test.support in 3.x (was Py3k DeprecationWarning in stdlib)