RetroSearch Browse

Mon Apr 18 19:30:56 CEST 2011 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-April/110854.html

On Mon, 18 Apr 2011 18:34:06 +0200, =?UTF-8?Q?=C3=89ric_Araujo?= <merwok at netwok.org> wrote:
> > Perhaps we need a @python_implementation_detail skip decorator?
>  Thatâ€™s called test.support.cpython_only (see also 
>  test.support.check_impl_detail).  Youâ€™re welcome.

Nope.  That's not what I was talking about.  I was talking about marking
a test as something that we require only the *python* implementation of
a module to pass (presumably because it tests an internal implementation
detail).  Thus a C accelerator would not be expected to pass that
test, nor would a C# accelerator, but pypy or any platform without
an accelerator (that is, anything *using* the python code) would be
expected to pass it.

I would hope that such tests would be vanishingly rare (that is,
that all needed tests can be expressed as black box tests).

--
R. David Murray           http://www.bitdance.com

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-April/110854.html below:

Pure Python/C Accelerator Module Compatibiilty Requirements