Anthony Flury <anthony.fl...@btinternet.com> added the comment:
I still support backporting to 3.6 and 3.7 :
Yes it is correct that this fix could change the behavior of existing test
code, but only if someone has written a test case for a function where :
1. The function under test uses dunder_iter iteration
2. The test case provides a read_data content to mock_open
3. The test case expects a response from the function which
implies that the file provided is empty/invalid in all cases - regardless
of the data provided.
I simply cannot see that someone would implement a test case such as this - if
your file has data, you would expect that your function under test would
recognize that the data exists, if that data is valid; and most code will
differentiate between invalid data and empty data.
So the only time I think this fix would change the behavior of existing code is
if someone has written an illogical test case, which is currently passing and
would now fail (since the test function will no2 see the data being provided
and respond as such).
Specifically the only change in behavior to existing code is to highlight an
invalid test case and potentially a bug in the code under test. It is for this
reason I support backporting.
----------
_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<https://bugs.python.org/issue32933>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
