On Saturday 05 February 2011 01:46 AM, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 7:54 PM, C. Michael Pilato<cmpil...@collab.net> wrote:
On 02/04/2011 02:09 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 12:15, Hyrum K Wright<hy...@hyrumwright.org> wrote:
...
We currently mark tests XFail (or Skip, or something else) by wrapping
them in the test_list in the test suite. Rather than doing it there,
I think it makes more sense to use Python's decorator syntax to mark
tests as XFail right at their definition, rather than down in the test
list. Keeping all attributes of a test in close proximity is a Good
Thing, imo. Attached is a patch which demonstrates this.
Sure.
...
+++ subversion/tests/cmdline/basic_tests.py (working copy)
XFail = svntest.testcase.xfail_deco
@@ -1961,6 +1961,7 @@
expected_status)
# Test for issue #1199
+@svntest.testcase.xfail_deco
@XFail
Oh yes. Much, much nicer to read.
Pilot committed in r1067273. That rev only changes basic_tests.py; I
plan to hit the others shortly.
-Hyrum
I don't know much about Python decorators, but what if I have a test
that does two things (like XFail and SkipUnless), do we have two
decorators at the definition?
Regards,
Arwin Arni
