On 27 June 2012 19:36, holger krekel <hol...@merlinux.eu> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 16:59 +0100, Floris Bruynooghe wrote:
>> On 27 June 2012 13:57, holger krekel <hol...@merlinux.eu> wrote:
>> > Setting resources as class attributes
>> > -------------------------------------------
>> >
>> > If you want to make an attribute available on a test class, you can
>> > use the resource_attr marker::
>> >
>> > @pytest.mark.resource_attr("db")
>> > class TestClass:
>> > def test_something(self):
>> > #use self.db
>>
>> I'm not convinced of creating a special purpose mark for this.
>> Firstly it seems like an anti-pattern in py.test to me, more like
>> xUnit style.
>
> unittest/xUnit-compat is the main idea for this new marker. It would
> work on pytest and unittest.TestCase classes alike. It's also reminiscent
> of Rob Collin's testscenario unittest-extension.
>
>> easily done with::
>>
>> class TestClas(object):
>> @classmethod
>> def setup_class(cls, item):
>> cls.db = item.getresource('db')
>
> Not really. Here we would need to check if the setup_class()
> accepts an item parameter and setup_class methods do not follow
> the hook-keyword-arg-calling convention. Also passing an
> item would be slightly arbitrary as the setup_class would
> only be called once for all of its test items (functions).
Oh, that will teach me to talk about an API I haven't used in a long
time without looking it up. I thought a node (not item) was already
passed in. Still, I think it would look nicer if it was possible to
get to the resources API from within .setup_module(module),
.setup_class(cls) and .setup_method(self, method) rather then needing
a new marker for this. The first of these should not be a problem I
guess, since it already has a node passed in. For .setup_method() the
method argument could have an item attribute. But I guess
.setup_class(cls) is the hardest. Would it be tricky to inspect the
arguments as done for hooks?
>> Also, I realised this API provides for what is probably most of the
>> cases of where I want dynamic resources:
>>
>> def pytest_setup_init(session):
>> for item in my_item_generator():
>> session.register_resource_factory(item.name, item)
>
> Not sure i understand this idea. Is it intended as a mixture of
> collection (my_item_generator) and setup (as the hook name suggests)?
My bad for writing a bad example, I shouldn't have used the word
"item" in there. Anyway the main point is that thanks to
.register_resource_factory() taking the name of the resource as an
argument I believe most, if not all, the cases where I wanted to
create funcargs/resources without knowing what they where beforehand
are solved.
Regards,
Floris
--
Debian GNU/Linux -- The Power of Freedom
www.debian.org | www.gnu.org | www.kernel.org
_______________________________________________
py-dev mailing list
py-dev@codespeak.net
http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/py-dev
