Closed tybug closed 4 months ago
aside from minor tactical comments above, this looks good to me!
good point, let's wait to sync š. Wouldn't be a great first experience if hypothesis[crosshair]
errored.
good point, let's wait to sync š. Wouldn't be a great first experience if
hypothesis[crosshair]
errored.
Yup yup. These are the correct changes, right? Shipped in 0.0.7
Let's cherrypick #4032 (+ a hypothesis-crosshair==0.0.7
bump) into this pr and then merge? Or however you want to do it Zac. I've double checked with hypothesis-crosshair and this is ready to merge from my perspective.
Let's cherrypick #4032 (+ a
hypothesis-crosshair==0.0.7
bump) into this pr and then merge? Or however you want to do it Zac. I've double checked with hypothesis-crosshair and this is ready to merge from my perspective.
That plan sounds perfect to me, one moment... ah, merge conflicts. Simpler to just run make upgrade-requirements
locally then, and... more diff, never mind, let's just take the crosshair upgrades and worry about the rest next week.
post_test_case_hook
has been renamed torealize
and is used in more places where we want to realize symbolic valuesavoid_realization
backend class variable added, which backends can set to disable features that would cause premature realizationhypothesis.provisional.realize
as part of our unstable-but-public api, to address https://github.com/pschanely/hypothesis-crosshair/issues/7 among others. If we want to make this less public, we can put it inhypothesis.internal.conjecture.data
for now.@pschanely here are the local modifications I made to hypothesis-crosshair:
This includes a fix for observability crashes (https://github.com/HypothesisWorks/hypothesis/issues/3914#issuecomment-2045735039). However, I get the following z3 unknown sat error when running crosshair with observability - any ideas @pschanely?