Message156942
| Author |
jcbollinger |
| Recipients |
asvetlov, jcbollinger, r.david.murray |
| Date |
2012年03月27日.17:00:26 |
| SpamBayes Score |
1.9155268e-06 |
| Marked as misclassified |
No |
| Message-id |
<1332867627.18.0.196309734538.issue14390@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
I looked at the packaging tests (thanks), but I didn't find anything useful to me. There were a couple whose names looked promising, but they turned out to be stubs. As far as I can tell, none of those tests actually invoke the system's C compiler, even indirectly. They are numerous, however, so I could have overlooked something.
It occurs to me that because the extension only needs to provide one function, I could just add that to _tkinter. That would ease testing without adding anything to the *public* API, but it seems a bit smelly to me because the point is that a user extension can trigger the bug. Also, the added function would be accessible to programs that choose to ignore privacy convention.
Also, I am assuming that tests only need to be runnable by developers and build automatons -- i.e. someone who can and did build Python from source. If they need also to be runnable by end users then a compiled version of any extension the tests depend upon needs to be included in binary distributions. |
|
History
|
|---|
| Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
| 2012年03月27日 17:00:27 | jcbollinger | set | recipients:
+ jcbollinger, r.david.murray, asvetlov |
| 2012年03月27日 17:00:27 | jcbollinger | set | messageid: <1332867627.18.0.196309734538.issue14390@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2012年03月27日 17:00:26 | jcbollinger | link | issue14390 messages |
| 2012年03月27日 17:00:26 | jcbollinger | create |
|