gh-109402: Fix regrtest findtests()

[vstinner]

Check for the full module name in SPLITTESTDIRS, not the relative module name.

• Issue: Bug in regrtest when name in SPLITTESTDIRS also matches a module name in tests #109402

[vstinner]

@sobolevn: Can you please check if this change fix your issue?

[sobolevn]

Oh, sorry, I've missed this PR and opened another one: #109404

[vstinner]

Does this change fix your issue?

[sobolevn]

Steps to test this:

1. Checkout gh-108303: Move test_future into its own subdir #109368
2. Rename Lib/test/test_future_stmt/test_future.py to Lib/test/test_future_stmt/test_future_stmt.py to reproduce the problem
3. Make sure that tests fail
4. Copy the proposed solution
5. Make sure that they pass

» ./python.exe -m test test_future_stmt
0:00:00 load avg: 1.91 Run 5 tests sequentially
0:00:00 load avg: 1.91 [1/5] test_future_stmt.test___future__
0:00:00 load avg: 1.91 [2/5] test_future_stmt.test_future3
0:00:00 load avg: 1.91 [3/5] test_future_stmt.test_future4
0:00:00 load avg: 1.91 [4/5] test_future_stmt.test_future5
0:00:00 load avg: 1.91 [5/5] test_future_stmt.test_future_stmt

== Tests result: SUCCESS ==

All 5 tests OK.

Total duration: 173 ms
Total tests: run=32
Total test files: run=5/5
Result: SUCCESS
                   

It works for me! Thanks!

[vstinner]

0:00:00 load avg: 1.91 [2/5] test_future_stmt.test_future3
0:00:00 load avg: 1.91 [3/5] test_future_stmt.test_future4
0:00:00 load avg: 1.91 [4/5] test_future_stmt.test_future5
0:00:00 load avg: 1.91 [5/5] test_future_stmt.test_future_stmt

These test names are not helpful. Would it be possible to come with better names while we are moving code/renaming files anyway?

[vstinner]

0:00:00 load avg: 1.91 [1/5] test_future_stmt.test___future__
0:00:00 load avg: 1.91 [5/5] test_future_stmt.test_future_stmt

Just from the name, it's not clear which test is testing the future statement... Both? Maybe propose a better name?

[vstinner]

Ignore my comments here, there were for PR #109368 :-)

[vstinner]

It works for me! Thanks!

Good. I prefer to avoid isdir() if possible.