Message143584
| Author |
ncoghlan |
| Recipients |
brandon-rhodes, brett.cannon, eric.araujo, eric.snow, ezio.melotti, ncoghlan, nedbat, sandro.tosi |
| Date |
2011年09月06日.05:32:15 |
| SpamBayes Score |
0.007422123 |
| Marked as misclassified |
No |
| Message-id |
<1315287135.88.0.24393401595.issue11561@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
Do we really want to enshrine shadowing the encodings module as the one true way to do this kind of thing?
Although I guess defining a way to do it properly would be a fairly major undertaking, so perhaps blessing the encodings hack is the practical way forward...
If we do that, I'd like to see a devguide patch that better explains how to generate your own coverage data for the stdlib with coverage.py, the encodings hack and the standard library coverage option. |
|