-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 769
fixed issue #1080, re-enable failing udp tests on windows #1167
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
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
6 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
2972f2b
fixed assert arguments order
dtacalau 8f4884c
fix issue #1080, re-enabled and fixed UDP tests failing on Windows. O…
dtacalau 3ae2dde
Added a note in the read/peek(_from) docs that on Windows if the data…
dtacalau d21c006
Added two new tests verifying ET behavior for UDP sockets events. The…
dtacalau e5256e1
replaces 64 kilobytes with 65536 bytes in the notes
dtacalau 3fc91d5
changes after review for new et tests: removed unneeded block, expect…
dtacalau File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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.
Same here as above.
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.
Not sure if possible, there are different error messages on Windows vs other platforms. How would you have one assert checking two different expected messages?
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.
I don't think mio makes any guarantees as to error messages. It doesn't matter terribly to me if the test only check that an error is received or it adds cfg flags to test messages per platform.
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.
You can just change this to
assert_error(socket1.send(DATA1), "address")
and add a comment saying it must say something about missing an address. Then we don't have this complexcfg!
stuff.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.
I'd rather not change this, unless you have a strong reason against it. Having cfg! in tests doesn't feel complex at all, actually it's weird we don't have more cfg! in them. Having just an assert_error(socket1.send(DATA1), "address") doesn't say much about the actual error you are expecting there. "address required" is enough to get an idea, "no address was supplied. (os error 10057)" is even better. IMO tests should be as explicit as possible.