Issue #18702: All skipped tests now reported as skipped.
diff --git a/Lib/test/test_math.py b/Lib/test/test_math.py
index a8677ce..c7f5752 100644
--- a/Lib/test/test_math.py
+++ b/Lib/test/test_math.py
@@ -906,38 +906,37 @@
# still fails this part of the test on some platforms. For now, we only
# *run* test_exceptions() in verbose mode, so that this isn't normally
# tested.
+ @unittest.skipUnless(verbose, 'requires verbose mode')
+ def test_exceptions(self):
+ try:
+ x = math.exp(-1000000000)
+ except:
+ # mathmodule.c is failing to weed out underflows from libm, or
+ # we've got an fp format with huge dynamic range
+ self.fail("underflowing exp() should not have raised "
+ "an exception")
+ if x != 0:
+ self.fail("underflowing exp() should have returned 0")
- if verbose:
- def test_exceptions(self):
- try:
- x = math.exp(-1000000000)
- except:
- # mathmodule.c is failing to weed out underflows from libm, or
- # we've got an fp format with huge dynamic range
- self.fail("underflowing exp() should not have raised "
- "an exception")
- if x != 0:
- self.fail("underflowing exp() should have returned 0")
+ # If this fails, probably using a strict IEEE-754 conforming libm, and x
+ # is +Inf afterwards. But Python wants overflows detected by default.
+ try:
+ x = math.exp(1000000000)
+ except OverflowError:
+ pass
+ else:
+ self.fail("overflowing exp() didn't trigger OverflowError")
- # If this fails, probably using a strict IEEE-754 conforming libm, and x
- # is +Inf afterwards. But Python wants overflows detected by default.
- try:
- x = math.exp(1000000000)
- except OverflowError:
- pass
- else:
- self.fail("overflowing exp() didn't trigger OverflowError")
-
- # If this fails, it could be a puzzle. One odd possibility is that
- # mathmodule.c's macros are getting confused while comparing
- # Inf (HUGE_VAL) to a NaN, and artificially setting errno to ERANGE
- # as a result (and so raising OverflowError instead).
- try:
- x = math.sqrt(-1.0)
- except ValueError:
- pass
- else:
- self.fail("sqrt(-1) didn't raise ValueError")
+ # If this fails, it could be a puzzle. One odd possibility is that
+ # mathmodule.c's macros are getting confused while comparing
+ # Inf (HUGE_VAL) to a NaN, and artificially setting errno to ERANGE
+ # as a result (and so raising OverflowError instead).
+ try:
+ x = math.sqrt(-1.0)
+ except ValueError:
+ pass
+ else:
+ self.fail("sqrt(-1) didn't raise ValueError")
@requires_IEEE_754
def test_testfile(self):