From 03b7b258014e300f1974b9f5832ccd74e692cc29 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Ned Batchelder Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2017 08:31:56 -0400 Subject: Update URLs so link-checker doesn't spew red. --- coverage/__init__.py | 2 +- coverage/ctracer/tracer.c | 4 ++-- 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) (limited to 'coverage') diff --git a/coverage/__init__.py b/coverage/__init__.py index d9a13936..63f488f2 100644 --- a/coverage/__init__.py +++ b/coverage/__init__.py @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ """Code coverage measurement for Python. Ned Batchelder -http://nedbatchelder.com/code/coverage +https://nedbatchelder.com/code/coverage """ diff --git a/coverage/ctracer/tracer.c b/coverage/ctracer/tracer.c index 095df11a..625a45a6 100644 --- a/coverage/ctracer/tracer.c +++ b/coverage/ctracer/tracer.c @@ -812,7 +812,7 @@ CTracer_handle_exception(CTracer *self, PyFrameObject *frame) the bug will be fixed everywhere coverage.py is supported, and we can remove this missing-return detection. - More about this fix: http://nedbatchelder.com/blog/200907/a_nasty_little_bug.html + More about this fix: https://nedbatchelder.com/blog/200907/a_nasty_little_bug.html */ STATS( self->stats.exceptions++; ) self->last_exc_back = frame->f_back; @@ -989,7 +989,7 @@ CTracer_call(CTracer *self, PyObject *args, PyObject *kwds) the new trace function before it has a chance to get called. To understand why, there are three internal values to track: frame.f_trace, c_tracefunc, and c_traceobj. They are explained here: - http://nedbatchelder.com/text/trace-function.html + https://nedbatchelder.com/text/trace-function.html Without the conditional on PyTrace_CALL, this is what happens: -- cgit v1.2.1