Additional test fixes

[perillo]

• [x] tests: fix incorrect code in test_compiled.py

  The SignalBase method of the SignalBase class is never called; probably it should have be the __init__ method. Remove it, since self.m_self is always set on subclasses.

  In collect_and_report_only, use Exception, instead of BaseException, since the former does not catch GeneratorExit, KeyboardInterrupt and SystemExit.

  In system_mode_can_record_and_report_binary, the test fails as expected, but the cause of the error is: NameError: name 'time' is not defined

  Import the time module.

  Errors reported by ruff check.

• [x] tests: make naming convention consistent in test_compiled.py

  Rename Pie to pie.

  I forgot to apply this change in d2403a7 (tests: use consistent naming convention in test cases).

• [x] tests: fix typo in test_python.py

  Rename python_coverage.runTestTest to python_coverage.runTest.

• [x] tests: fix test_compiled.address_sanitizer_coverage test

  Restore building of the sanitizer-coverage executable in cmake, and just skip the test if it was not built with clang.

  The original code made it hard to understand the purpose of the test.

• [x] tests: remove obsolete code from tests/CMakeLists

  cmake 3.12 supports the POSITION_INDEPENDENT_CODE property, so there is no need for the version check.

NOTES

I'm not fully sure about commit "tests: fix test_compiled.address_sanitizer_coverage test".

[codecov[bot]]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:

Project coverage is 65.68%. Comparing base (b374103) to head (449fec0).

Additional details and impacted files

```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## master #435 +/- ## ========================================== - Coverage 65.70% 65.68% -0.03% ========================================== Files 58 58 Lines 4514 4514 Branches 4171 4171 ========================================== - Hits 2966 2965 -1 - Misses 1548 1549 +1 ```

:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[SimonKagstrom]

Thanks, looks good!

The sanitizer coverage collection is also not completely working, and is probably not very interesting anyway (since it still requires special compile options, which is sort of the point of kcov to start with).

And kudos for the very good PR descriptions by the way!

[perillo]

Thanks, looks good!

The sanitizer coverage collection is also not completely working, and is probably not very interesting anyway (since it still requires special compile options, which is sort of the point of kcov to start with).

Yes, I was aware that the sanitizer is not working correctly. The problem is that the old test used assert False to force the test to fail. Now the code is a bit more easy to understand.

And kudos for the very good PR descriptions by the way!

Thanks! Also, thank you for taking your time to review all the changes that I proposed.