GeezerVisonThe World Wide Web, restored to 800 pixels of glory. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Home|About|Gaming cabinet|Archives|How it works|Starter sites | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GeezerVison is showing github.com — bpo-40059: tomllib by hukkin · Pull Request #31498 · python/cpython Conversation
|
|
A question: upstream (Tomli) is formatted with Black, using Black's defaults. This means a line length of 88. Should I reformat with line length at 79? |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
|
This will need NEWS and "What's new" entries: You can add this to https://github.com/python/cpython/blob/main/.github/CODEOWNERS |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
|
Perhaps it'd make sense to include the tomli version used (or even the git commit hash), to make future syncing easier. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
It was previously suggested that I remove Tomli version from the standard library port: hukkin#2 (comment) I plan to include a migration guide in Tomli repository, also including commit hash that tracks what is currently in the stdlib. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
|
Would it be good to mention in the docs why |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
|
I should get to the review this week or the next.
No, I don't think that's worth it. And anyway, line length is not the only point where Black disagrees with PEP8 (starting with, like, the whole philosophy).
Let's leave docs improvements to future PRs, so they get a proper discussion and don't delay this PR? |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Co-authored-by: Petr Viktorin <[email protected]>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I have a few test nitpicks, but I'm happy to merge this!
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
| if isinstance(expected, MissingFile): | ||
| # Would be nice to xfail here, but unittest doesn't seem | ||
| # to allow that in a nice way. | ||
| continue |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
MissingFile looks unnecessary. Does tomli need it?
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ah, I see it does.
For a poor man's xfail, you could you assert that p.stem is one of the expected failing cases.
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
MissingFile looks unnecessary. Does tomli need it?
Yeah one of the two external test suites has a couple test cases where the expected data is missing.
For a poor man's xfail, you could you assert that p.stem is one of the expected failing cases.
I'm not sure I understand what you mean. Maybe you can show with the "Add a suggestion" feature?
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think something like:
if isinstance(expected, MissingFile):
assert valid.stem in ("xfail_test_case1, "xfail_test_case2", ...)
continue
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Oh yes, of course, thanks. Committed that.
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
| INVALID_FILES = tuple((DATA_DIR / "invalid").glob("**/*.toml")) | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| class TestData(unittest.TestCase): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
For peace of mind, could you assert len(VALID_FILES) > 0, and same for INVALID_FILES?
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
👍 Makes sense. Added the asserts.
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
|
🤖 New build scheduled with the buildbot fleet by @encukou for commit 2898cc3 🤖 If you want to schedule another build, you need to add the ":hammer: test-with-buildbots" label again. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
|
It seems the failing CI job ( |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
|
The alpha 6 release is a bit bumpy and I don't want to destabilize it, so I'm holding off the merge until it's out. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
|
Let's get it in! |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.