Skip to content
This repository was archived by the owner on Sep 18, 2018. It is now read-only.

random ports feature#86

Closed
pwilczynskiclearcode wants to merge 1 commit intodbfixtures:masterfrom
pwilczynskiclearcode:master
Closed

random ports feature#86
pwilczynskiclearcode wants to merge 1 commit intodbfixtures:masterfrom
pwilczynskiclearcode:master

Conversation

@pwilczynskiclearcode
Copy link
Copy Markdown

No description provided.

@pwilczynskiclearcode
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

@fizyk @tomislater Could you review?
I've introduced possibilty of random selection of fixtue port (with checking if port is free).
I've kept code backward compatible that's why I've used '?' for random ports instead of None

@pwilczynskiclearcode pwilczynskiclearcode changed the title random ports feature (preview) random ports feature Nov 9, 2014
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sttrange fact - it never used host/port from arguments

@coveralls
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Coverage Status

Coverage decreased (-7.82%) when pulling ecd78c7 on pwilczynskiclearcode:master into ed27f0b on ClearcodeHQ:master.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I do not get it ;p Is it checks if ports is string which is mapping into int, right? So, we do not need 50 and 51 lines. This try is enough.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You're completely right

Adds a possibility of passing '?' in port= argument.
@coveralls
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Coverage Status

Coverage decreased (-9.62%) when pulling b5e2cfd on pwilczynskiclearcode:master into ed27f0b on ClearcodeHQ:master.

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants