[Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] r66863 - python/trunk/Modules/posixmodule.c
Stephen J. Turnbull
stephen at xemacs.org
Fri Oct 10 09:02:45 CEST 2008
"Martin v. Löwis" writes:
> > If they do fail, they're not "false" positives. If they're "false",
> > then the test is broken, no?
> Correct. But they might well be broken, no?
I would hope some effort is made that they not be. If they generate a
positive, I would expect that the contributor would try to fix that
before committing, no? If they discover that it's "false", they fix
or remove the test; otherwise they document it.
> > So find a way to label them as tests
> > added ex-post, with the failures *not* being regressions but rather
> > latent bugs newly detected, and (presumably) as "wont-fix".
> No such way exists,
Add a documentation file called "README.expected-test-failures".
AFAIK documentation is always acceptable, right?
Whether that is an acceptable solution to the "latent bug" problem is
a different question. I'd rather know that Python has unexpected
behavior, and have a sample program (== test) to demonstrate it, than
More information about the Python-Dev