Chris Calloway added the comment: At the PyOhio sprints, I noticed this issue and found it interesting for low hanging fruit. First I went to make tests for this enhancement, only to find that report(), report_partial_closure(), and report_full_closure did not already have tests.
In adding tests for these methods, I also found that dircmp is only tested for one directory level, leaving out coverage for a pretty wide swath of dircmp. The first patch I'm submitting here is just for the report methods for the level of dircmp testing which already exists. A subsequent patch will test the report methods a couple of directory levels deep to get full coverage for report_full_closure(). Even if this enhancement is not accepted, the report methods do need tests. I'm putting this patch here in advance of any other work to get feedback on the flavor of tests I have given the report methods on the existing one directory level of dircmp testing before proceeding with any deeper testing. The tests in this patch all pass with the existing filecmp code without adding any significant execution time to test_filecmp. Any deeper testing of dircmp will also have to not be necessarily comprehensive, as the permutations of test inputs start to become too time-consuming. setUp and tearDown may also need some refactoring for deeper testing. Should adding tests for the report methods be a separate issue from this enhancement? ---------- keywords: +patch Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file26625/issue-15454-1.patch _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue15454> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
