On Tue, Jul 6, 2021 at 5:49 AM Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com
<mailto:vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>> wrote:
25.06.2021 21:20, John Snow wrote:
> This turns run_linters() into a bit of a hybrid test; returning non-zero
> on failed execution while also printing diffable information. This is
> done for the benefit of the avocado simple test runner, which will soon
> be attempting to execute this test from a different environment.
>
> (Note: universal_newlines is added to the pylint invocation for type
> consistency with the mypy run -- it's not strictly necessary, but it
> avoids some typing errors caused by our re-use of the 'p' variable.)
>
> Signed-off-by: John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com <mailto:jsnow@redhat.com>>
> ---
> tests/qemu-iotests/297 | 10 ++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tests/qemu-iotests/297 b/tests/qemu-iotests/297
> index 1e8334d1d4..7db1f9ed45 100755
> --- a/tests/qemu-iotests/297
> +++ b/tests/qemu-iotests/297
> @@ -68,19 +68,22 @@ def run_linters(
> files: List[str],
> directory: str = '.',
> env: Optional[Mapping[str, str]] = None,
> -) -> None:
> +) -> int:
> + ret = 0
>
> print('=== pylint ===')
> sys.stdout.flush()
>
> # Todo notes are fine, but fixme's or xxx's should probably just be
> # fixed (in tests, at least)
> - subprocess.run(
> + p = subprocess.run(
> ('python3', '-m', 'pylint', '--score=n', '--notes=FIXME,XXX',
*files),
> cwd=directory,
> env=env,
> check=False,
> + universal_newlines=True,
> )
> + ret += p.returncode
>
> print('=== mypy ===')
> sys.stdout.flush()
> @@ -113,9 +116,12 @@ def run_linters(
> universal_newlines=True
> )
>
> + ret += p.returncode
> if p.returncode != 0:
> print(p.stdout)
>
> + return ret
> +
>
> def main() -> None:
> for linter in ('pylint-3', 'mypy'):
>
Hmm..
1. Rather unusual for a function in python to return int error-code, more
usual is raising exceptions..
It is strange, but I felt that if these tests were going to run in "two
contexts" that I would avoid raising Exceptions and trying to understand how it
would affect either call stack.
2. making a sum of return codes looks odd to me
Just a cheap way to state that a 0 return is good, and a non-zero return code
is failure.
3. Do we really want to run mypy if pylint failed? Maybe better not doing
it, and just switch s/check=False/check=True/ ? This way:
I suppose we could. For the sake of CI, I like seeing more output instead of
less so that you can save yourself the trouble and fix everything before
re-submitting the CI job. What do you think?