Wip - Puts issue #4118 under test - test min similarities #4179
Conversation
doublethefish
force-pushed
the
wip/test_min-similarities
branch
2 times, most recently
from
9ce0ef2
to
98d4037
Compare
doublethefish
force-pushed
the
wip/test_min-similarities
branch
from
0279e0e
to
19c0740
Compare
|
Just saw this... I came across the same issue, and proposed a fix in #4178. |
Thank you so much for highlighting that, I had completely missed the PR. Legend. :) |
Taken in isolation, this commit may appear heavy-weight. The intent here
is to have a linter run and retain all state information about that run
so we can inspect what happened.
What this commit shows is that the checkers the linter knows about have
the right config, but still multi-job [MJ] runs are incorrect.
see: assert checker.config.min_similarity_lines == min_similarity_lines
I think the MJ failiures are because SimilarChecker.reduce_map_data()
constructs a new SimilarChecker and then the linter doesn't call
set_option().
The process by which the set_option() calls are made in the normal run
is opaque to me, but perhaps someone else has a better idea(?).
doublethefish
force-pushed
the
wip/test_min-similarities
branch
from
19c0740
to
49d6750
Compare
|
I am happy for these tests to go in now. Thoughts? |
|
|
||
|
|
||
| @pytest.mark.xfail | ||
| @pytest.mark.parametrize("min_similarity_lines", [0, 1, 4, 1000]) |
| Partially tests bug #4118 and #4173""" | ||
| config_file = tmp_path / "setup.cfg" | ||
|
|
||
| source_streams = [ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could we create a source_streams fixture ? I've seen this part + the check three times :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sure, if I get time :)
Co-authored-by: Pierre Sassoulas <pierre.sassoulas@gmail.com>
|
The open bugs only appear to reference py 2.x - I see the same issue on py3.8. Is this expected to fix both, or should i open a new bug? also, I see this is |
|
@bentheadset 2.7.0 in the issue is a version of pylint, not python we're only supporting python 3.6 to 3.9 right now. Regarding the MR we'll merge it once the test pass. And it's going to be in the next release of pylint, we don't have a set schedule for that. |
|
@doublethefish should we close this MR in favor of #4175 ? |
|
I'm closing in order to cleanup the PR lists please do not hesitate to reopen a new one if necessary. |
Steps
doc/whatsnew/<current release.rst>.Description
Puts issue #4118 under test …
1b477cd
Taken in isolation, this commit may appear heavy-weight. The intent here
is to have a linter run and retain all state information about that run
so we can inspect what happened.
What this commit shows is that the checkers the linter knows about have
the right config, but still multi-job [MJ] runs are incorrect.
see: assert checker.config.min_similarity_lines == min_similarity_lines
I think the MJ failiures are because SimilarChecker.reduce_map_data()
constructs a new SimilarChecker and then the linter doesn't call
set_option().
The process by which the set_option() calls are made in the normal run
is opaque to me, but perhaps someone else has a better idea(?).
Type of Changes
Related Issue