Yasuhito FUTATSUKI wrote on Sun, 13 Oct 2019 04:01 +00:00: > On 2019/10/13 7:24, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > > Yasuhito FUTATSUKI wrote on Sat, 12 Oct 2019 03:01 +00:00: > >> If textual comparison is sufficient here, it is right to open file > >> text mode (with suitable, unified set of `encoding', `errors', and > >> `newline' > >> parameter). Otherwise, if strict comparison is needed, we must avoid > >> unwanted, > >> not one-on-one corresponding conversion from bytes to str applied by > >> Python. > >> In the latter case, it may be rather incorrect to use > >> compare_and_display_lines(). > > > > Good question. I suspect textual comparison would suffice here, because > > this is a tree conflicts test, not a keywords semantics test, and the > > test case seems to revolve around the tree changes, not around the > > newline characters. > > I see. Now I agree it would suffice here. > > > So, how about: > > > > 1. Make the test use non-binary mode for changing and reading the > > file 'lambda'. > > > > 2. Locally revert the C part of r1841731 and make sure the modified test > > still (correctly) fails. (That revision both added the test and > > fixed the bug the test checks for.) > > So it looks sufficient to me.
Cool. Will you perchance have time to do this? No worries if not. Also, what about the svnadmin_tests.py patch you posted upthread? Is there a reason not to go ahead and commit it to trunk? (and even nominate it for backport in 1.13.x/STATUS) Cheers, Daniel
