Skip to content

bpo-33284 Add to a unit test to improve coverage for numbers.py #6480

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

Closed
wants to merge 6 commits into from
Closed

bpo-33284 Add to a unit test to improve coverage for numbers.py #6480

wants to merge 6 commits into from

Conversation

londinburgh
Copy link

@londinburgh londinburgh commented Apr 15, 2018

Small change to improve unit test coverage. My first merge request for python.

https://bugs.python.org/issue33284

@the-knights-who-say-ni
Copy link

Hello, and thanks for your contribution!

I'm a bot set up to make sure that the project can legally accept your contribution by verifying you have signed the PSF contributor agreement (CLA).

Unfortunately we couldn't find an account corresponding to your GitHub username on bugs.python.org (b.p.o) to verify you have signed the CLA (this might be simply due to a missing "GitHub Name" entry in your b.p.o account settings). This is necessary for legal reasons before we can look at your contribution. Please follow the steps outlined in the CPython devguide to rectify this issue.

When your account is ready, please add a comment in this pull request
and a Python core developer will remove the CLA not signed label
to make the bot check again.

Thanks again to your contribution and we look forward to looking at it!

@londinburgh
Copy link
Author

Hi, I have signed the CLA.

@zware
Copy link
Member

zware commented Apr 17, 2018

Hi @londinburgh. While you are all set up on the CLA, the committer (@trevaskis) is not, and @the-knights-who-say-ni requires that all committers and authors on a PR have the CLA signed.

@londinburgh
Copy link
Author

Ok, now all contributors have signed!

@londinburgh
Copy link
Author

Have updated this.

Copy link
Contributor

@BoboTiG BoboTiG left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for the patch @londinburgh. I did not test as I think there are 2 little mistakes :)

Also it may be worth adding a NEWs entry?


@property
def real(self):
return self._imag
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It should be return self._real, right?


@property
def imag(self):
return self._real
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

And same here with self._imag.

@csabella
Copy link
Contributor

@londinburgh, please make the changes requested by @BoboTiG. Thanks!


@real.setter
def real(self, value):
self._real = value
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

These setters would be better placed alongside the getters.

@bedevere-bot
Copy link

A Python core developer has requested some changes be made to your pull request before we can consider merging it. If you could please address their requests along with any other requests in other reviews from core developers that would be appreciated.

Once you have made the requested changes, please leave a comment on this pull request containing the phrase I have made the requested changes; please review again. I will then notify any core developers who have left a review that you're ready for them to take another look at this pull request.

@zware zware added the skip news label Sep 9, 2019
@csabella
Copy link
Contributor

Since this PR is against an unknown repository, I'm going to close it. A new pull request can be opened for the issue, but if it's based on this PR, please credit the original author.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants