Added -j shortcut for --processes=#7362
Conversation
|
I am totally in favor of |
NelleV
left a comment
NelleV
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
At some point we will have to refactor a bit this code, but for now this looks good.
tests.py
Outdated
|
|
||
| if '--no-pep8' in sys.argv: | ||
| parser = argparse.ArgumentParser() | ||
| parser.add_argument('--no-pep8', action="store_true") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do we really need no-pep8 and pep8? Seems they are redundant.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's certainly confusing. I think the idea is that '--pep8' means do only PEP8 testing, '--no-pep8' means do everything except PEP8 testing, and leaving both out means test everything including PEP8.
When using argparse, it would be good to add 'help' kwargs to each add_argument call.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
oh wow… Thanks for the explanation.
|
I suppose argparse will interfere with nose on |
|
Haven't looked at the PR itself but in any case you can prevent argparse from adding a |
|
Sure. Added it 👍 |
|
This seems to have broken the See https://docs.python.org/3/library/argparse.html#nargs for |
|
milestoned as 2.0.1, but if the backport is at all hard, lets not bother. |
|
Latest commit should fix passthrough flags like |
tacaswell
changed the title
-j shortcut for --processes=-j shortcut for --processes=
bcongdon
force-pushed
the
multi-process-flag
branch
from
445397a to
7f29efe
Compare
|
@tacaswell This does not apply cleanly on v2.x. I don't think it is worth bothering with this patch for 2.0. What do you think? |
|
I'll answer: No, just leave it in master. |
QuLogic
changed the title
-j shortcut for --processes=-j shortcut for --processes=
7 participants
Addresses #7361.
The argv parsing is a bit naive, but I'm not sure what matplotlib's opinion on
getoptorargparseis.