Issue543867
This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub,
and is currently read-only.
For more information,
see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.
Created on 2002-04-14 22:18 by hfoffani, last changed 2022-04-10 16:05 by admin. This issue is now closed.
Files | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
File name | Uploaded | Description | Edit | |
test_complex_future.py | hfoffani, 2002-04-14 22:21 | test_complex_future.py | ||
test_complex.py.diff3 | hfoffani, 2002-04-14 23:47 | cvs diff -c test_complex.py | ||
diff3.txt | doerwalter, 2003-07-14 21:08 | |||
test_complex_future.py | rhettinger, 2003-07-15 06:58 | Revised complex future test in unittest format | ||
diff4.txt | doerwalter, 2003-07-17 11:25 | merge test_complex_future into test_complex |
Messages (21) | |||
---|---|---|---|
msg39575 - (view) | Author: Hernan Foffani (hfoffani) | Date: 2002-04-14 22:18 | |
Here are 3 patches for: - test_complex.py: . add several checks to force execution of unvisited parts of complexobject.c code. . add a test for complex floor division corresponding bug #543387 and fix #543865 - test_complex_future.py . add test for "future" true division. (actually this is not a patch but the hole file) - test_b1.py . add test for bug #543840 and it's fix at patch #543865 Regards, -Hernan |
|||
msg39576 - (view) | Author: Hernan Foffani (hfoffani) | Date: 2002-04-14 23:47 | |
Logged In: YES user_id=112690 |
|||
msg39577 - (view) | Author: Hernan Foffani (hfoffani) | Date: 2002-04-14 23:48 | |
Logged In: YES user_id=112690 Following Tim's advise to group together bug/fix/test, I'll leave this patch entry for improvements in the tests of complex numbers. Then the valid files are: 21173: test_complex_future.py and 21180: test_complex.diff3 |
|||
msg39578 - (view) | Author: Guido van Rossum (gvanrossum) * | Date: 2002-04-22 17:51 | |
Logged In: YES user_id=6380 I don't understand your comment. Are you withdrawing the files test_complex.py and test_b1.py? Have you uploaded these to separate patch issues? You should be able to delete them as the original submitter; ifthis doesn't work, let me know and I'll do it. |
|||
msg39579 - (view) | Author: Hernan Foffani (hfoffani) | Date: 2002-04-22 18:02 | |
Logged In: YES user_id=112690 Yes to both questions. I'm withdrawing test_complex.py and test_b1.py. I can't delete them and I double checked that I were correctly logged in as hfoffani. SourceForge error: File Delete: ArtifactFile: Permission Denied |
|||
msg39580 - (view) | Author: Guido van Rossum (gvanrossum) * | Date: 2002-04-22 18:09 | |
Logged In: YES user_id=6380 OK, I've deleted them for you. Who do you expect to review this? |
|||
msg39581 - (view) | Author: Tim Peters (tim.peters) * | Date: 2002-04-22 18:21 | |
Logged In: YES user_id=31435 I'm not sure what lines like vereq(a ** 105, a ** 105) vereq(b ** -105, b ** -105) vereq(b ** -30, b ** -30) are trying to test. That we get the same answer when we do exactly the same thing twice? Note that complex % has been deprecated: no point adding a test for a deprecated feature. The error msg for complex pow says "remainder"; it shouldn't. |
|||
msg39582 - (view) | Author: Hernan Foffani (hfoffani) | Date: 2002-04-22 18:31 | |
Logged In: YES user_id=112690 On: vereq(a ** 105, a ** 105) ... etc ... The c code in complexobject.c has special cases when the exponent is > 100, < than -100, and in-between. I didn't want to test for equality with constants to avoid messing up with floating point issues. |
|||
msg39583 - (view) | Author: Hernan Foffani (hfoffani) | Date: 2002-04-22 18:38 | |
Logged In: YES user_id=112690 Regarding "the error msg for complex pow says "remainder"; it shouldn't" you are correct, the exception string has a bad wording. |
|||
msg39584 - (view) | Author: Brett Cannon (brett.cannon) * | Date: 2003-07-06 19:58 | |
Logged In: YES user_id=357491 The patch is now severely outdated since test_complex.py has been converted to PyUnit, but it might be pertinent to go through the patch and see if any tests are there that could be added. |
|||
msg39585 - (view) | Author: Raymond Hettinger (rhettinger) * | Date: 2003-07-14 07:49 | |
Logged In: YES user_id=80475 Walter, do you care to add these in unittest form? Also, since the tests are to validate bug fixes, they are appropriate to go into Py2.3. |
|||
msg39586 - (view) | Author: Walter Dörwald (doerwalter) * | Date: 2003-07-14 08:53 | |
Logged In: YES user_id=89016 OK, I'll see if I can look at the patches later today. |
|||
msg39587 - (view) | Author: Walter Dörwald (doerwalter) * | Date: 2003-07-14 21:08 | |
Logged In: YES user_id=89016 Reworking test_complex.py.diff3 into the attached diff3.txt I don't see any increase in code coverage for complexobject.c (it stays at 91.84%) except for the file writing test which brings the coverage up to 92.95%. The current tests in test_complex.py seem to cover most test cases from test_complex.py.diff3 (except that test_complex.py.diff3 uses ** and % and the current test_complex.py uses pow and __mod__). So I'd say we add the file writing test and drop the rest. I'll look at test_complex_future.py tomorrow. |
|||
msg39588 - (view) | Author: Raymond Hettinger (rhettinger) * | Date: 2003-07-15 06:16 | |
Logged In: YES user_id=80475 diff3.txt looks good and runs fine on my machine. I'm surprised that it did not increase code coverage. The comparisons of a ** 105 to itself should be commented as a whitebox test of a special case code path. |
|||
msg39589 - (view) | Author: Raymond Hettinger (rhettinger) * | Date: 2003-07-15 06:58 | |
Logged In: YES user_id=80475 Converted test_complex_future.py to unittest format. See attachment. |
|||
msg39590 - (view) | Author: Walter Dörwald (doerwalter) * | Date: 2003-07-15 18:58 | |
Logged In: YES user_id=89016 test_complex.py is checked in as rev 1.12. test_complex_future.py looks good, although I don't exactly understand its purpose, as there are tests from true division and floor division in test_complex.py already. We could extend check_div() in test_complex.py to try both __truediv__ and __floordiv__. This would IMHO be better than the code duplication in test_complex_future.py |
|||
msg39591 - (view) | Author: Raymond Hettinger (rhettinger) * | Date: 2003-07-15 21:11 | |
Logged In: YES user_id=80475 That's a much better plan. |
|||
msg39592 - (view) | Author: Walter Dörwald (doerwalter) * | Date: 2003-07-17 11:25 | |
Logged In: YES user_id=89016 OK here is a patch (diff4.txt) that merges test_complex_future.py into test_complex.py. |
|||
msg39593 - (view) | Author: Raymond Hettinger (rhettinger) * | Date: 2003-07-18 02:42 | |
Logged In: YES user_id=80475 Since __floordiv__ is deprecated for complex, it should be left out of the test. Otherwise, it is ready to load. Because they've already tagged the Py2.3 release candidate, am marking this as a Py2.4 addition. |
|||
msg39594 - (view) | Author: Hernan Foffani (hfoffani) | Date: 2003-07-18 08:39 | |
Logged In: YES user_id=112690 thank you guys, for taking up these. sadly, i don't have linux available anymore. i must tell you that the patch was the result of a self- excercise to learn about CPython. don't be surprise if you don't see mayor improvements in code coverage percentages. at the time I was very happy if I saw just 1 new LOC on a branch tested: it meant that I understood Python's internals involved. sorry for the trouble. regards, -hernan |
|||
msg39595 - (view) | Author: Walter Dörwald (doerwalter) * | Date: 2003-08-05 16:01 | |
Logged In: YES user_id=89016 Checked in as: Lib/test/test_complex.py 1.13+1.14 and Lib/test/test_complex.py 1.12.6.1 |
History | |||
---|---|---|---|
Date | User | Action | Args |
2022-04-10 16:05:13 | admin | set | github: 36434 |
2002-04-14 22:18:13 | hfoffani | create |