Message193153
| Author |
terry.reedy |
| Recipients |
JayKrish, Todd.Rovito, philwebster, terry.reedy |
| Date |
2013年07月16日.05:40:44 |
| SpamBayes Score |
-1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified |
Yes |
| Message-id |
<1373953245.23.0.990794064621.issue18425@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
As I said on one of the other issues, which I hope you read, we have the option of gui tests when mocking becomes too complicated. So at least for now, put the test that requires marks in a separate test case with requires('gui') in setUPClass.
The problem with a full implementation of marks is that they change position when text is inserted or deleted before their position. Also, some mark functions are easier if they are stored in a dict, while one function and the movement operations are easier if they are stored in a sorted list. A partial implementation that allowed only 1 or 2 marks would be easier that a full implementation allowing any number. Mock marks that do not move (and don't need to because of no inserts or deletes between definition and use) would also be easy. So I want to see how marks need to be used for testing before doing anything.
Even when a mock is used, we can temporarily use the tk version to verify that the mock is working right. I did that in the patch for #18279. See the commented out code in
http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/22ce68d98345. |
|
History
|
|---|
| Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
| 2013年07月16日 05:40:45 | terry.reedy | set | recipients:
+ terry.reedy, Todd.Rovito, JayKrish, philwebster |
| 2013年07月16日 05:40:45 | terry.reedy | set | messageid: <1373953245.23.0.990794064621.issue18425@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2013年07月16日 05:40:45 | terry.reedy | link | issue18425 messages |
| 2013年07月16日 05:40:44 | terry.reedy | create |
|