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
Small test improvement #1068
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Small test improvement #1068
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #1068 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 94.45% 94.45%
=======================================
Files 47 47
Lines 6849 6851 +2
=======================================
+ Hits 6469 6471 +2
Misses 380 380
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
What does this do? Should it be merged |
I think so. As in python3, we rely on the |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
A small nitpick but otherwise LGTM
@@ -536,10 +536,13 @@ def test_nested_exception_dispatch(backend): | |||
We rely on the Python 3 built-in __cause__ system that already | |||
report this kind of information to the user. | |||
""" | |||
with raises(ValueError) as excinfo: | |||
with raises((ValueError, MyExceptionWithFinickyInit)) as excinfo: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This will never be called as we don't pass custom_exception
to the exception_raiser
so probaly better to not complicate the test?
with raises((ValueError, MyExceptionWithFinickyInit)) as excinfo: | |
with raises(ValueError) as excinfo: |
Trying to reproduce the
test_nested_exception_dispatch[loky]
failure observed in #1055 as it seems unrelated to dask.