Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Can we revive test_avmc? #572

Open
junkmd opened this issue Jun 15, 2024 · 0 comments
Open

Can we revive test_avmc? #572

junkmd opened this issue Jun 15, 2024 · 0 comments
Labels
tests enhance or fix tests

Comments

@junkmd
Copy link
Collaborator

junkmd commented Jun 15, 2024

Modern packaging methods were introduced in #556 and #557. Until then, the code base in setup.py was old, such as not having distutils replaced by setuptools until Python 3.12 support.

As a result, the cognitive load when reading setup.py has been reduced, making class test(Command): easier to read and clearly showing what it was doing. (I confess I hadn't properly read it before since it is not hooked when running tests with the unittest command.)

After skimming through it, I understand that it enables the following options:

  • tests= or t: Specify the names of tests to run, separated by commas
  • use-resources= or u: Add resource to be used during testing
  • refcounts or r: Conduct tests that depend on sys.gettotalrefcount in a debug-built Python

Tests executed with these options register either AvmcIfc.dll or AvmcIfc_x64.dll.

In other words, if we create a GHA workflow to mimic the tests executed from this setup, we might be able to revive test_avmc, which remained broken in #298 (#267).

test_avmc is not a high priority for me at the moment to actively push for a discussion, so this is more of a memo.
However, if any community members are interested, I would be happy to cooperate.

@junkmd junkmd added the tests enhance or fix tests label Jun 15, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
tests enhance or fix tests
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant