Fix for python 3.6a #64
Conversation
| 1.3 | ||
| --- | ||
|
|
||
| * Fix error when running ``pytest-mock`` in Python 3.6a. Thanks `@hackebrot`_ for the report (`#59`_). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Also applies to 3.6.0b1, I suppose?!
Maybe just say 3.6 then?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good point, specially because it is now part of CI. Will change it.
1 similar comment
nicoddemus
force-pushed
the
travis-py36
branch
from
cd2cc7a to
1eb1f9f
Compare
|
Nice one @nicoddemus @blueyed! 👍 |
| @@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ | |||
| version = '1.2' | |||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
| class MockFixture(object): | |||
| class MockFixture: | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Wouldn't make this MockFixture an old-style class on Python 2? Is that intended?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh right. I tried that first as a fix and forgot to revert it.
On the other hand being an old-style class doesn't really matter for MockFixture because it doesn't have any comparison operators or meta-classes, which is where old-style and new-style classes differ. Do you rather me revert that?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd prefer that, as I have no idea how an old-style class works, and I'm sure I'm not the only one 😉
There was a problem hiding this comment.
But apparently @nicoddemus knows how they work and that it does not matter in this case.
Makes the code cleaner, too - so I am +1 for keeping it like this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It is good btw to forget about old-style things.. ;)
We have tests for catching that hopefully.. :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Except that maybe @nicoddemus isn't the only one working on that code 😉
And I agree about forgetting about old-style things, that's why it should be a new-style class 😉
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@The-Compiler
Well:
% git shortlog -sn
122 Bruno Oliveira
4 Rafael Bertoldi (fogo)
3 Jurko Gospodnetić
2 Florian Bruhin
2 Pavel Savchenko
2 Tiago Nobrega
2 jhermann
;)
But it's under the pytest-dev umbrella of course, so you are right in that regard.
new-style classes however are only relevant for py2, and I was disregarding this by ignoring old-style things.. ;)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Since @The-Compiler prefers to bring it back, no worries! Pushed 931785c. 😁
This was removed by accident when working on #64
Fix #59