Message166779
| Author |
nedbat |
| Recipients |
bkabrda, chris.jerdonek, ncoghlan, nedbat, pitrou, serhiy.storchaka |
| Date |
2012年07月29日.15:56:45 |
| SpamBayes Score |
-1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified |
Yes |
| Message-id |
<1343577406.61.0.728823361148.issue14803@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
Chris, I'm not sure how to answer your questions. The more powerful and flexible, the better. There is no "must" here. I'm looking for a way to avoid the hacks coverage.py has used in the past to measure coverage in subprocesses. A language feature that allowed me to externally configure the interpreter to run some of my code first would allow me to do that. |
|