-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 03/27/2012 06:21 PM, Marius Gedminas wrote:
$ bin/python setup.py dev
Is that different from 'python setup.py develop'? I've never seen 'dev' before.
'dev' is an alias (defined in 'setup.cfg' for the following:: setup.py develop easy_install zope.interface[testing]
running develop ... Finished processing dependencies for zope.interface[testing] $ bin/nosetests --with-coverage ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Name Stmts Miss Cover Missing ---------------------------------------------------------------- zope.interface 30 0 100% zope.interface.adapter 440 0 100% zope.interface.advice 69 0 100% zope.interface.common 0 0 100% zope.interface.common.idatetime 98 0 100% zope.interface.common.interfaces 81 0 100% zope.interface.common.mapping 32 0 100% zope.interface.common.sequence 38 0 100% zope.interface.declarations 312 0 100% zope.interface.document 54 0 100% zope.interface.exceptions 21 0 100% zope.interface.interface 378 0 100% zope.interface.interfaces 137 0 100% zope.interface.registry 300 0 100% zope.interface.ro 25 0 100% zope.interface.verify 48 0 100% ---------------------------------------------------------------- TOTAL 2063 0 100% ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Ran 707 tests in 2.880s
Ooh, and I also see a tox.ini on that branch! That's extremely welcome!
(Lately when I had to make some changes to zope.* packages I've been kind of annoyed about the non-straightforwardness of testing all supported Python versions. I briefly tried tox, but didn't want to spend hours figuring out how to make it play nice with buildout.)
I still use buildout for complicated "application" installs, but have grown to dislike it for testing "library" code.
Question: does the 100% coverage number mean both C code *and* Python fallbacks are tested now?
They both pass the same suite of tests. I can't guarantee 100% covereage of the C code, but given that it passes the same tests, I'm satisfied.
Question: does 'bin/python setup.py test' work?
Yes. I consider that a necessary-but-not-sufficient minium for any library.
It seems to be becoming a sort of a universal standard for "run all the tests of this Python package please", and is usually not that difficult to hook up. (If not, I may volunteer to hook it up.)
Question: can we still use zope.testrunner?
You can bootstrap and run the buildout and then run 'bin/test'.
I like some of zope.testrunner's features a lot (like colorization, test filtering options explicitly by module and by test name). (I may also volunteer to hook this up, if it's not hooked up.)
OK $ bin/python setup.py docs running easy_install Searching for zope.interface[docs] ... Finished processing dependencies for zope.interface[docs] $ cd docs $ PATH=../bin:$PATH make html ... build succeeded.
Build finished. The HTML pages are in _build/html. ------------------------------ %< ---------------------------------------
Ooh, are we going to see zope.interface docs on readthedocs.org?
I'm not opposed in principle. :)
In addition to minimizing "Zope-iness", providing full coverage using small, descriptively-named unittests makes the code more maintainable. For instance, I expect to build on top of these improved tests as the basis for a conversion to a "subset", supporting Python 2.6, 2.7, and 3.x from a single codebase, without needing a translator like lib2to3.
Ooh, nice!
I think it will also be easier to improve the docs, now that they no longer bear the burden of supplying coverage / regression testing for the code. We can remove a bunch of extremely-terse fragments, and have the examples which remain focus more on improving the reader's understanding than exercising some corner case.
Unless the consensus is against it, I plan to merge this branch to the trunk early next week.
I'm +1 for this.
Thanks for the support! Tres. - -- =================================================================== Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 tseaver@palladion.com Palladion Software "Excellence by Design" http://palladion.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk9yQEIACgkQ+gerLs4ltQ7bzQCgne6Zv0hJHwjA7HyeKum1ZysY zcQAn31knVQ19/va/mjXl97oSWj9ELRN =J/dt -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----