* Ben Finney [2008-08-22 01:25 +0200]:
On 21-Aug-2008, Nicolas Évrard wrote:
% nosetests --cover-erase --with-coverage --cover-package=relatorio
And it shows the following table after the tests has runned:
Name Stmts Exec Cover Missing
----------------------------------------------------------------
relatorio 3 3 100%
relatorio.reporting 78 0 0% 21-146
relatorio.templates 11 0 0% 21-39
relatorio.templates.chart 48 0 0% 21-93
relatorio.templates.opendocument 212 0 0% 21-331
relatorio.templates.pdf 44 0 0% 21-86
----------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL 396 3 0%
I believe python-coverage is behaving correctly in this case. Python
doesn't care whether a module is actually a symlink on disk; different
module files are different files. Indeed, modules should be
implemented so that they work whether or not the filesystem supports
symlinks. Python's namespace support makes this easy.
Well while developping I often replace the module in my $HOME/python
by a symlink to the directory where I am working so I do not use the
symlink to have code accessible through two different namespaces. So
here's my setup:
$PYTHONPATH=.:$HOME/python
% ls $HOME/python
relatorio -> wherever the developpment version is
So it is precisely because python does not care if the module is a
symlink or a real directory that python-coverage should consider those
file as the same.
Based on this, I don't think this is a use case for which
python-coverage should be adapted. I'm intending to mark this report
"wontfix".
Well I don't think so (but I agree that I should have used wishlist
but I forgot to change it in the vim buffer).
Anyway thank you for your time.
--
(°> Nicolas Évrard
/ ) Liège - Belgique
^^
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
