Guido van Rossum added the comment: Am I really still needed on this issue?
On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 7:46 PM, Hiroyuki Takagi <rep...@bugs.python.org> wrote: > > Hiroyuki Takagi added the comment: > > Thank you for reviewing patch. > > I wrote test and updated patch. To pass the test, both this patch and > issue25599's patch are required. > > Changes of the patch: > - copy __code__ not only functions but also methods > - add autospec (create_autospec) suppoort > > I have completely missed about autospec, thank you for a mention about it. > For autospec, simply copying original __code__ to funcopy makes error on > existing tests. > That's why I changed the src of exec, but it seems to be quite ad-hoc. It > may be better to be improved, but I don't have any good idea, sorry. > > On the tests of this patch, I wonder if it's better to use assertIs(.., > True/False) instead of assertTrue/False, since it was one of the problem in > issue25599. > To apply this change and pass test, need to change > asyncio.iscoroutinefunction to return bool. The change would be very easy, > just update issue25599's patch like `return_value = bool(getattr(func, ...`. > > ---------- > Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file41664/mock2.patch > > _______________________________________ > Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> > <http://bugs.python.org/issue26140> > _______________________________________ > ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue26140> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com