Using Suppressor to silence tests
#957
Draft
Conversation
This file contains 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
epolack
force-pushed
the
suppressor
branch
19 times, most recently
from
0d0c877 to
e12a506
Compare
still `[` in `boxstr`
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
I find it always bothering to have to scroll to look where tests fail. This is a simple change that will only output failing tests.
It's a quick alternative to more fine-grained outputs (#56).
(I have checked locally that the full backtrace is indeed printed in different failing test cases.)Lots of edge cases, and it feels too hacky. Not sure if there's a way for a simpler alternative…
Let's see if passed tests are printed at the end.(see https://github.com/JuliaMolSim/DFTK.jl/actions/runs/7832171350/job/21370246591?pr=851 for example. Strangely error is not printed, but was not printed either in https://github.com/JuliaMolSim/DFTK.jl/actions/runs/7831316138/job/21367378204?pr=851)Maybe actually better to take the time to use Logging, and rewrite println... Should not be that big à work and much more flexible and clean.