Skip to content
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

Remove errant print statements from tests #13702

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 21, 2025

Conversation

jakelishman
Copy link
Member

If any print is necessary for debugging failed test cases, we probably ought to reconfigure the test runner's display mechanisms, or use the built-in configuration of the unittest assert methods to produce better results.

Summary

Details and comments

If any `print` is necessary for debugging failed test cases, we probably
ought to reconfigure the test runner's display mechanisms, or use the
built-in configuration of the `unittest` assert methods to produce
better results.
@jakelishman jakelishman added type: qa Issues and PRs that relate to testing and code quality Changelog: None Do not include in changelog labels Jan 21, 2025
@jakelishman jakelishman requested a review from a team as a code owner January 21, 2025 13:22
@qiskit-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

One or more of the following people are relevant to this code:

  • @Qiskit/terra-core

@coveralls
Copy link

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 12887902365

Details

  • 0 of 0 changed or added relevant lines in 0 files are covered.
  • 7 unchanged lines in 2 files lost coverage.
  • Overall coverage increased (+0.02%) to 88.956%

Files with Coverage Reduction New Missed Lines %
crates/qasm2/src/expr.rs 1 94.02%
crates/qasm2/src/lex.rs 6 92.48%
Totals Coverage Status
Change from base Build 12885084518: 0.02%
Covered Lines: 79447
Relevant Lines: 89310

💛 - Coveralls

Copy link
Contributor

@ElePT ElePT left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Absolutely. Probably would be good to backport too?

@ElePT ElePT added the stable backport potential The bug might be minimal and/or import enough to be port to stable label Jan 21, 2025
@ElePT ElePT enabled auto-merge January 21, 2025 14:02
@ElePT ElePT added this pull request to the merge queue Jan 21, 2025
Merged via the queue into Qiskit:main with commit d884a3c Jan 21, 2025
18 checks passed
mergify bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 21, 2025
If any `print` is necessary for debugging failed test cases, we probably
ought to reconfigure the test runner's display mechanisms, or use the
built-in configuration of the `unittest` assert methods to produce
better results.

(cherry picked from commit d884a3c)
@jakelishman jakelishman deleted the remove-test-print branch January 21, 2025 16:25
github-merge-queue bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 21, 2025
If any `print` is necessary for debugging failed test cases, we probably
ought to reconfigure the test runner's display mechanisms, or use the
built-in configuration of the `unittest` assert methods to produce
better results.

(cherry picked from commit d884a3c)

Co-authored-by: Jake Lishman <[email protected]>
emilkovacev pushed a commit to emilkovacev/qiskit that referenced this pull request Feb 7, 2025
If any `print` is necessary for debugging failed test cases, we probably
ought to reconfigure the test runner's display mechanisms, or use the
built-in configuration of the `unittest` assert methods to produce
better results.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Changelog: None Do not include in changelog stable backport potential The bug might be minimal and/or import enough to be port to stable type: qa Issues and PRs that relate to testing and code quality
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants