##// END OF EJS Templates
Merge pull request #864 from ipython/termzmq...
Merge pull request #864 from ipython/termzmq Two-process terminal frontend: this branch adds a new IPython frontend, invoked via ipython console that behaves much like the regular, old ipython, but runs over zeromq in two processes. This means that such a client can connect to existing kernels initiated by the Qt console, the notebook or standalone (i.e. via `ipython kernel`). We still have some internal architectural cleanups to perform to simplify how the various frontends talk to the kernels, but by having this main piece in, the complete picture is clearer, and that refactoring work can be carried post-0.12. This frontend should still be considered experimental.

File last commit:

r4892:0707dc54
r5633:afa2b63b merge
Show More
dtexample.py
164 lines | 2.8 KiB | text/x-python | PythonLexer
"""Simple example using doctests.
This file just contains doctests both using plain python and IPython prompts.
All tests should be loaded by nose.
"""
from IPython.utils.py3compat import doctest_refactor_print
def pyfunc():
"""Some pure python tests...
>>> pyfunc()
'pyfunc'
>>> import os
>>> 2+3
5
>>> for i in range(3):
... print i,
... print i+1,
...
0 1 1 2 2 3
"""
return 'pyfunc'
@doctest_refactor_print
def ipfunc():
"""Some ipython tests...
In [1]: import os
In [3]: 2+3
Out[3]: 5
In [26]: for i in range(3):
....: print i,
....: print i+1,
....:
0 1 1 2 2 3
Examples that access the operating system work:
In [1]: !echo hello
hello
In [2]: !echo hello > /tmp/foo
In [3]: !cat /tmp/foo
hello
In [4]: rm -f /tmp/foo
It's OK to use '_' for the last result, but do NOT try to use IPython's
numbered history of _NN outputs, since those won't exist under the
doctest environment:
In [7]: 'hi'
Out[7]: 'hi'
In [8]: print repr(_)
'hi'
In [7]: 3+4
Out[7]: 7
In [8]: _+3
Out[8]: 10
In [9]: ipfunc()
Out[9]: 'ipfunc'
"""
return 'ipfunc'
def ranfunc():
"""A function with some random output.
Normal examples are verified as usual:
>>> 1+3
4
But if you put '# random' in the output, it is ignored:
>>> 1+3
junk goes here... # random
>>> 1+2
again, anything goes #random
if multiline, the random mark is only needed once.
>>> 1+2
You can also put the random marker at the end:
# random
>>> 1+2
# random
.. or at the beginning.
More correct input is properly verified:
>>> ranfunc()
'ranfunc'
"""
return 'ranfunc'
def random_all():
"""A function where we ignore the output of ALL examples.
Examples:
# all-random
This mark tells the testing machinery that all subsequent examples should
be treated as random (ignoring their output). They are still executed,
so if a they raise an error, it will be detected as such, but their
output is completely ignored.
>>> 1+3
junk goes here...
>>> 1+3
klasdfj;
>>> 1+2
again, anything goes
blah...
"""
pass
@doctest_refactor_print
def iprand():
"""Some ipython tests with random output.
In [7]: 3+4
Out[7]: 7
In [8]: print 'hello'
world # random
In [9]: iprand()
Out[9]: 'iprand'
"""
return 'iprand'
@doctest_refactor_print
def iprand_all():
"""Some ipython tests with fully random output.
# all-random
In [7]: 1
Out[7]: 99
In [8]: print 'hello'
world
In [9]: iprand_all()
Out[9]: 'junk'
"""
return 'iprand_all'