This is the second item from the action items proposed by@terryjreedy (#63882 (comment))

1. Minidom docstrings issue gh-128508: Add some docstrings to xml.dom.minidom #128477
2. Comment out the empty testsgh-63882: Comment out emptytest_minidom tests #128948
3. Test revisions - to be addressed in later pr

@terryjreedy (I can’t request a review in any other way)

Why are we using## instead of a simple# for commenting out the test? Is there any plan of actually implementing those tests in the future? can we add some# TODO as well so that we can find them easily in the future?

@picnixz This was requested by Terry in his comment on the issue. I guess it is easier to find them?

I think I'll me comfortable with an explicit "TODO" since we also used# CRASH for the test C API to make them easier to find (with a##, we need to filter out the results but with# TODO, we know that's a TODO).

Ok, I've seen that#63882 (comment) is actually the comment that explained the different steps to do (it was hidden by GH). So there's a plan to implement something. If the tests are meant to be implemented in a short future,## is fine, but if it's not, then maybe# TODO is better.

These stubs have been present for 25 years, since Python 2.0!
7993bcc

I'd rather see tests added rather than commented out. If not added, let's delete them otherwise I can see these being around until 2050 🙃

Quoting@voidspace:

The same is true for commenting-out code; if a block of commented code is going into a release, it shouldn't exist. If it is code that may be restored, make a ticket and reference the commit hash for the code delete.

https://opensource.com/article/17/5/30-best-practices-software-development-and-testing

There is actually already a patch that would add some of them:https://bugs.python.org/file33258/issue19683.patch

Tough I am not sure who submitted it.

Maybe checking the old bpo page helps?

https://bugs.python.org/issue19683