Skip to content

Better coverage in test_check #361

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
jaraco merged 7 commits into from
May 4, 2025
Merged

Better coverage in test_check #361

jaraco merged 7 commits into from
May 4, 2025

Conversation

@jaraco
Copy link
Member

@jaraco jaraco commented May 4, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Closes #359

  • Consolidate the generation of test cases.
  • Implemented the cases as a parameterized fixture.
  • Run the test unconditionally; it's a declared requirement.
  • Split restructuretext tests into two to cover both cases.
  • shorten the test names
  • More precisely measure the expectation.

@jaraco jaraco mentioned this pull request May 4, 2025
Draft
@jaraco jaraco force-pushed the feature/better-rst-check branch 2 times, most recently from 646c28d to 8b89e58 Compare May 4, 2025 13:12
@jaraco jaraco mentioned this pull request May 4, 2025
Merged
@jaraco jaraco force-pushed the feature/better-rst-check branch from 8b89e58 to d16fc3e Compare May 4, 2025 13:14
@jaraco jaraco merged commit 08149a8 into main May 4, 2025
40 checks passed
@jaraco jaraco deleted the feature/better-rst-check branch May 4, 2025 13:16
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

No reviews

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Fix test_check to cover both branches

2 participants

@jaraco