Hi Florent, On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 09:05:23AM +0100, Florent hivert wrote: > > > I just spent/lost one hour on the following missfeature (at least in my > > > opinion) of TestsSuite... Mind the "..." ;-) Those dots are particularly > > > heavy > > > dots... Still don't get it ? > > > > > > Try > > > myself._test_my_reaction() ... done ? > > > Anything happening ? No ? Really nothing ? > > > Then read below... > > > > > > When testing something in verbose mode the typical output of sage is: > > > > > > sage: P = Sets().example("inherits") > > > sage: TestSuite(P).run(verbose=True) > > > running ._test_an_element() ... done > > > running ._test_element_pickling() ... done > > > running ._test_not_implemented_methods() ... done > > > running ._test_pickling() ... done > > > running ._test_some_elements() ... done > > > > > > The problem arise if I want to tests this in a doctests. The "..." match > > > anything. Therefore if I add a new test, which for example output > > > > > > running ._test_an_element() ... done > > > running ._test_element_pickling() ... done > > > running ._test_len() ... done > > > running ._test_not_implemented_methods() ... done > > > running ._test_pickling() ... done > > > running ._test_some_elements() ... done > > > > > > The two lines > > > running ._test_element_pickling() ... done > > > running ._test_len() ... done > > > are matched by the pattern: > > > running ._test_element_pickling() ... done > > > and therefore no error is detected... I'm very doubtful that this is on > > > purpose. Is it. I has the nice consequence that adding a _test_ methods > > > very > > > low in the Category Hierarchy (I was adding one in Objects) doesn't break > > > anything as soon as you are not too at the beginning or the end of the > > > alphabet.
It was not originally on purpose. But I left it on purpose because of the practicality of this "feature". And I am pretty sure I had advertised it to you. > But I don't think it's a good. Idea. I agree it's a bit tricky. > > > Is there a way to deactivate this "..." matching or should we > > > systematically > > > change those "..." by for example ". . ." ? > > > > > > > Ouch! I wish you would change "..." to something else, e.g., ".." > > > > running ._test_element_pickling() .. done I am fine with this change, as long as whoever does it takes the responsibility of systematically updating all such doctests each time a new test is added somewhere in the hierarchy :-) By the way I prefer ". . ." to ".." which gives better visual feed back on what's going on (a computation is being run). Cheers, Nicolas -- Nicolas M. Thiéry "Isil" <nthi...@users.sf.net> http://Nicolas.Thiery.name/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---