On 15 September 2015 at 12:42, Nathann Cohen <nathann.co...@gmail.com> wrote: > John, > > I do not follow you in your message. Surely the doctests have a double > purpose (documentation+test), but nothing prevents you from writing a > good documentation on one side with "# not tested" flags (so that the
That is an interesting idea, as a way to get good illustrative examples into the manual without slowing down the testing process. But of course it would be better to have a set-up where I could (at least temprarily) turn back on the testing of these, since if they are not ever tested then it will not be long before they are broken. > tests are informative to the users) while keeping in a 'TEST' sections > some doctests dedicated to checking that the methods works, even > though they would be hard to follow for the users. Yes, I understand the purpose of technical TESTS which are not so useful in the manual. > > If this is why this file is long to test, well, then that can be arranged. That sounds like a threat! I'm glad you don't know where I live.... John > > Nathann > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "sage-devel" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
