[Patches] [ python-Patches-543867 ] test for patch #543865 & others

SourceForge.net noreply@sourceforge.net
Mon, 14 Jul 2003 14:08:09 -0700


Patches item #543867, was opened at 2002-04-15 00:18
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by doerwalter
You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=305470&aid=543867&group_id=5470

Category: Tests
Group: Python 2.3
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Hernan Martinez Foffani (hfoffani)
Assigned to: Walter Dörwald (doerwalter)
Summary: test for patch #543865 & others

Initial Comment:
Here are 3 patches for:

- test_complex.py:
    . add several checks to force execution of
unvisited       
    parts of complexobject.c code.
    . add a test for complex floor division corresponding
    bug #543387 and fix #543865

- test_complex_future.py
    . add test for "future" true division.
    (actually this is not a patch but the hole file)

- test_b1.py
    . add test for bug #543840 and it's fix at patch
    #543865

Regards,
-Hernan


----------------------------------------------------------------------

>Comment By: Walter Dörwald (doerwalter)
Date: 2003-07-14 23:08

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=89016

Reworking test_complex.py.diff3 into the attached diff3.txt
I don't see any increase in code coverage for
complexobject.c (it stays at 91.84%) except for the file
writing test which brings the coverage up to 92.95%. The
current tests in test_complex.py seem to cover most test
cases from test_complex.py.diff3 (except that
test_complex.py.diff3 uses ** and % and the current
test_complex.py uses pow and __mod__). So I'd say we add the
file writing test and drop the rest.

I'll look at test_complex_future.py tomorrow.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Walter Dörwald (doerwalter)
Date: 2003-07-14 10:53

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=89016

OK, I'll see if I can look at the patches later today.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Raymond Hettinger (rhettinger)
Date: 2003-07-14 09:49

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=80475

Walter, do you care to add these in unittest form?

Also, since the tests are to validate bug fixes, they are 
appropriate to go into Py2.3.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Brett Cannon (bcannon)
Date: 2003-07-06 21:58

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=357491

The patch is now severely outdated since test_complex.py has 
been converted to PyUnit, but it might be pertinent to go through 
the patch and see if any tests are there that could be added.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Hernan Martinez Foffani (hfoffani)
Date: 2002-04-22 20:38

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=112690

Regarding "the error msg for complex pow says "remainder"; 
it shouldn't" you are correct, the exception string has a 
bad wording.



----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Hernan Martinez Foffani (hfoffani)
Date: 2002-04-22 20:31

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=112690

On:
   vereq(a ** 105, a ** 105) ... etc ...
The c code in complexobject.c has special cases when the 
exponent is > 100, < than -100, and in-between.
I didn't want to test for equality with constants to avoid 
messing up with floating point issues.



----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Tim Peters (tim_one)
Date: 2002-04-22 20:21

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=31435

I'm not sure what lines like

vereq(a ** 105, a ** 105)
vereq(b ** -105, b ** -105)
vereq(b ** -30, b ** -30)

are trying to test.  That we get the same answer when we do 
exactly the same thing twice?

Note that complex % has been deprecated:  no point adding a 
test for a deprecated feature.

The error msg for complex pow says "remainder"; it 
shouldn't.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Guido van Rossum (gvanrossum)
Date: 2002-04-22 20:09

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=6380

OK, I've deleted them for you. Who do you expect to review
this?

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Hernan Martinez Foffani (hfoffani)
Date: 2002-04-22 20:02

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=112690

Yes to both questions. I'm withdrawing test_complex.py
and test_b1.py.
I can't delete them and I double checked that I were
correctly logged in as hfoffani.
SourceForge error:
File Delete: ArtifactFile: Permission Denied


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Guido van Rossum (gvanrossum)
Date: 2002-04-22 19:51

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=6380

I don't understand your comment. Are you withdrawing the
files test_complex.py and test_b1.py? Have you uploaded
these to separate patch issues? You should be able to delete
them as the original submitter; ifthis doesn't work, let me
know and I'll do it.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Hernan Martinez Foffani (hfoffani)
Date: 2002-04-15 01:48

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=112690

Following Tim's advise to group together bug/fix/test, I'll
leave this patch entry for improvements in the tests of
complex numbers.

Then the valid files are:
21173: test_complex_future.py
and
21180: test_complex.diff3


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Hernan Martinez Foffani (hfoffani)
Date: 2002-04-15 01:47

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=112690




----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=305470&aid=543867&group_id=5470