Yasuhito FUTATSUKI wrote on Sun, 13 Oct 2019 04:01 +00:00:
> On 2019/10/13 7:24, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> > Yasuhito FUTATSUKI wrote on Sat, 12 Oct 2019 03:01 +00:00:
> >> If textual comparison is sufficient here, it is right to open file
> >> text mode (with suitable, unified set of `encoding', `errors', and `newline'
> >> parameter). Otherwise, if strict comparison is needed, we must avoid unwanted,
> >> not one-on-one corresponding conversion from bytes to str applied by Python.
> >> In the latter case, it may be rather incorrect to use
> >> compare_and_display_lines().
> >
> > Good question. I suspect textual comparison would suffice here, because
> > this is a tree conflicts test, not a keywords semantics test, and the
> > test case seems to revolve around the tree changes, not around the
> > newline characters.
>
> I see. Now I agree it would suffice here.
>
> > So, how about:
> >
> > 1. Make the test use non-binary mode for changing and reading the
> > file 'lambda'.
> >
> > 2. Locally revert the C part of r1841731 and make sure the modified test
> > still (correctly) fails. (That revision both added the test and
> > fixed the bug the test checks for.)
>
> So it looks sufficient to me.
Cool. Will you perchance have time to do this? No worries if not.
Also, what about the svnadmin_tests.py patch you posted upthread? Is
there a reason not to go ahead and commit it to trunk? (and even nominate
it for backport in 1.13.x/STATUS)
Cheers,
Daniel
Received on 2019-10-15 00:15:59 CEST