[Numpy-discussion] set_local_path in test files

[Robert Kern]

On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 13:58, Pearu Peterson <pearu at cens.ioc.ee> wrote:
> On Wed, July 2, 2008 8:25 pm, Robert Kern wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 09:01, Alan McIntyre <alan.mcintyre at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 9:35 AM, Pearu Peterson <pearu at cens.ioc.ee>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Alan McIntyre wrote:
>>>>> Some test files have a set_local_path()/restore_path() pair at the
>>>>> top, and some don't.  Is there any reason to be changing sys.path like
>>>>> this in the test modules?  If not, I'll take them out when I see them.
>>>>
>>>> The idea behind set_local_path is that it allows running tests
>>>> inside subpackages without the need to rebuild the entire package.
>>>
>>> Ah, thanks; I'd forgotten about that.  I'll leave them alone, then.  I
>>> made a note for myself to make sure it's possible to run tests locally
>>> without doing a full build/install (where practical).
>>
>> Please remove them and adjust the imports. As I've mentioned before,
>> numpy and scipy can now reliably be built in-place with "python
>> setup.py build_src --inplace build_ext --inplace". This is a more
>> robust method to test uninstalled code than adjusting sys.path.
>
> Note that the point of set_local_path is not to test uninstalled
> code but to test only a subpackage.

And nose does that just fine by itself.

-- 
Robert Kern

"I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless
enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as
though it had an underlying truth."
  -- Umberto Eco