Alexander Belopolsky <belopol...@users.sourceforge.net> added the comment:
[Copying msg111059 from issue9317] On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 9:45 AM, Eli Bendersky <rep...@bugs.python.org> wrote: .. > As far as I understand, when you run: > > py3d -m trace -C pickle-trace.d -c -m test_pickle.py > > The first -m flag applies to the trace module. Python uses > runpy.run_module to load it, and then passes it its arguments (-C and > onwards). > When I said "run from command line", I meant something like $ python Lib/test/test_pickle.py I am not sure if this uses runpy machinery, but I suspect it does. The trace output should not include runpy calls that load the trace module itself, but $ python -m trace <flags> Lib/test/test_pickle.py might show the runpy calls that occur when you run $ python Lib/test/test_pickle.py without tracing. BTW, too bad that '-m' is taken, but I think trace.py should grow a --run-module option so that you can trace equivalents of python -m executions: $ python -m trace <flags> --run-module test.test_pickle > Moreover, since runpy is only the machinery to execute trace.py, does > it even make sense to include it in coverage? > > What do you think? I think you should ask python-dev. :-) Note that most C/C++ coverage tools do include pre-main calls in coverage. In case of C++, a lot of things may happen before main(). Whatever the solution is, it should be unified between trace, profile, and pdb modules. ---------- assignee: -> belopolsky nosy: +belopolsky _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue9323> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
