Re: Conflict between PEAK and coverage.py
Bobby Impollonia <[email protected]> Tue, 22 Mar 2011 16:20:54 -0700
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.python.peak |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 3:18 PM, P.J. Eby <pje-Wh6+Hckhi6HFNGf7iClzIwC/[email protected]> wrote: > At 02:13 PM 3/22/2011 -0700, Bobby Impollonia wrote: >> >> It works correctly with --timid. It's somewhat inconvenient because it >> makes the tests run several times slower and nose's coverage plugin >> doesn't expose that option. > > If you can get the coverage developers to tell me what DecoratorTools is > doing wrong, exactly, I can try to fix it. I added a coverage bug to track the issue and maybe get some eyes on it from that side: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issue/125/coverage-removes-decoratortoolss-tracing