On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 10:01 AM, William Stein <wst...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 9:48 AM, Robert Miller <r...@rlmiller.org> wrote: >> I was recently searching through the source and I noticed that some >> loads/dumps doctests say #indirect doctest, and others don't. I know >> that for __reduce__ methods, this is correct, but it struck me that >> perhaps all loads/dumps doctests are indirect. I guess this is a >> philosophical/moral question, but I wanted to get other people's >> opinions... What do y'all think? > > Clearly, all but two of them are indirect (the two that test the loads > and dumps functions!).
How very correct. That was my thinking as well. Although I suppose this is strictly pedantic, since the coverage/doctesting scripts don't care about the distinction. Coverage just looks for a loads(dumps test in each class, and doctesting doesn't care, so I don't see a point in fixing this, other than to be consistent. NB There are many of these types of tests which are not marked as indirect. Should I open a ticket, or find something more productive to do? -- Robert L. Miller http://www.rlmiller.org/ -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
