BLD/TST: @network, inspect formatted expection rather then str(e) #6192
Conversation
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
Contributor
|
gr8! |
added 2 commits
January 31, 2014 00:01
…om network issues too much" This reverts commit 0c938e6.
Author
|
8 greens in a row on 2.7/3.3. Looks good. |
ghost
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 30, 2014
BLD/TST: @network, inspect formatted expection rather then str(e)
ghost
merged commit
This pull request was closed.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
@jreback, here's the next attempt.
I guess the output we see from pdb and str(e) are not the same thing,
so this compares the strings against a properly formatted exception
(I ommited the traceback, shouldn't be relevent).
I'l rerun this on travis 15 times or so before merging.
#6144