-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 34.1k
bpo-27200: fix several doctests #604
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
13 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
45d0735
bpo-27200: fix email.compat32-message.rst doctests
marco-buttu 165a439
bpo-27200: fix functions.rst doctests
marco-buttu ba6efbc
bpo-27200: fix ipaddress.rst doctests
marco-buttu 38e42a0
bpo-27200: fix reprlib.rst doctests
marco-buttu 446db45
bpo-27200: fix whatsnew/3.2.rst doctests
marco-buttu f47f49e
bpo-27200: fix urllib.parse.rst doctests
marco-buttu 5ad6d1b
bpo-27200: fix shlex.rst doctests
marco-buttu 73aacd4
bpo-27200: get the absolute file path in testsetup
marco-buttu b94e308
bpo-27200: use hanging indentation in ipaddress.rst
marco-buttu 5c38137
bpo-27200: skipped a test that can fail.
marco-buttu fbae43f
bpo-27200: use doctest SKIP option instead of ::
marco-buttu 2aab0c4
bpo-27200: fix wrong doctest directive syntax
marco-buttu 2cd4aec
bpo-27200: fix bug in testsetup
marco-buttu File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Wouldn't using "::" be more correct here? I understand the use of "::" is a bit inconsistent in the rest of the file, but I prefer to keep it as is if it doesn't break any doctests.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hi @berkerpeksag , to make the test after The quoting is compatible with UNIX shells to pass,
remote_commandshould be defined. In order forremote_commandto be defined, we need to execute this test and the next one, that is why I changed::`` to ``:. If you want to use::instead of:, than you have to skip the test that uses theremote_commandname, but I do not see any good reason for that.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
See my comment below about skipping tests explicitly.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Mmm, I think there is a misunderstanding here. I do not want to skip this test group, but I want it to be executed. If we skip these tests then
remote_commandwill not be defined and the next test groups (after The quoting is compatible with UNIX shells) will fail.Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hello @berkerpeksag, only this point is still open. Here I prefere to execute the test, because this example defines
remote_command, that is used in a subsequent example. In this way all tests pass. If you want us to skip this test, we have to skip the subsequent tests that use theremote_commandname. Let me know which option you prefere. Thank you very much for your time :-)There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sorry, I forgot to comment on this earlier. Your change looks fine to me. I still need to run the tests locally.