Re: [PATCH 2/2] iotests: Run pylint and mypy in a testcase

[Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1752 bytes --]

Am 13.05.2020 um 14:14 hat Max Reitz geschrieben:
> On 11.05.20 18:35, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> > We made sure that iotests.py passes pylint. It would be a shame if we
> > allowed new patches in that break this again, so let's just add a
> > meta-test case that runs pylint on it.
> > 
> > While we don't pass mypy --strict yet, we can already run it with a few
> > options that would be part of --strict to make sure that we won't
> > regress on these aspects at least until we can enable the full thing.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
> > ---
> >  tests/qemu-iotests/297     | 44 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  tests/qemu-iotests/297.out |  3 +++
> >  tests/qemu-iotests/group   |  1 +
> >  3 files changed, 48 insertions(+)
> >  create mode 100755 tests/qemu-iotests/297
> >  create mode 100644 tests/qemu-iotests/297.out
> 
> Bit of a shame that this takes 8 s (on my machine at least) and will run
> with every format/protocol combination unless I explictly exclude it
> with -x meta...

Yes, it's surprising how slow these tools are. At least mypy caches some
stuff, so the second run is considerably faster, but pylint doesn't do
that.

I wonder if there is some overlap between mypy and pylint that we could
configure away in pylint to speed it up.

> But I suppose the actual problem here is the fact that
> tests still can’t just define a “This is the format/protocol combination
> I require” and then you can just let all tests run once with that
> default combination.  (And maybe afterwards run all tests again with
> some custom combinations, but only when that makes sense.)

It's probably not hard to find more "actual problems" in the test
harness...

Kevin

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]