RetroSearch Browse

Sat Oct 26 19:32:14 CEST 2013 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2013-October/129884.html

On 27 October 2013 01:10, Serhiy Storchaka <storchaka at gmail.com> wrote:
> 26.10.13 15:50, Stefan Krah написав(ла):
>
>> nick.coghlan <python-checkins at python.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/a9bbc2d0c1dc
>>> -HAVE_DOCSTRINGS = (check_impl_detail(cpython=False) or
>>> -                   sys.platform == 'win32' or
>>> -                   sysconfig.get_config_var('WITH_DOC_STRINGS'))
>>> +# Rather than trying to enumerate all the cases where docstrings may be
>>> +# disabled, we just check for that directly
>>> +
>>> +def _check_docstrings():
>>> +    """Just used to check if docstrings are enabled"""
>>> +
>>> +HAVE_DOCSTRINGS = (_check_docstrings.__doc__ is not None)
>>>
>>>   requires_docstrings = unittest.skipUnless(HAVE_DOCSTRINGS,
>>
>>
>> I think that does not detect --without-doc-strings (i.e. the C docstrings
>> are
>> empty).
>
>
> Indeed. HAVE_DOCSTRINGS was introduced to skip tests for the C docstrings.
> Python docstrings tests are skipped if sys.flags.optimize >= 2.

That's *extraordinarily* confusing, especially when Serhiy suggested I
use the flag when testing a pure Python module.

Regards,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan at gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2013-October/129884.html below:

[Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython: Issue #19330: Handle the no-docstrings case in tests