Why is mocking the LOG object useful/being used? Testing functionality which depends on LOG triggers/calls imho is bad practice (and usually means something needs to be refactored).
LOG statements, and calls should be expected to move/be removed often so testing functionality in tests with them seems like the wrong approach. My 2 cents. From: Deepak Shetty <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Tuesday, June 3, 2014 at 9:16 AM To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: [openstack-dev] [Cinder] How to mock the LOG inside cinder driver <deepakcs> Hi, whats the right way to mock the LOG variable inside the driver ? I am mocking mock.patch.object(glusterfs, 'LOG') as mock_logger <deepakcs> and then doing... <deepakcs> mock_logger.warning.assert_called_once() - which passes and is expected to pass per my code <deepakcs> but <deepakcs> mock_logger.debug.assert_called_once() - shud fail , but this also passes ! <deepakcs> any idea why ? I feel that I am not mocking the LOG inside the driver correctly. I also tried mock.patch.object(glusterfs.LOG, 'warning'), mock.patch.object(glusterfs.LOG, 'debug') as mock_logger_warn and mock_logger_debug respectively But here too .debug and .warning both passes.. while the expected result is for .warning to pass and .debug to fail So somehow I am unable to mock LOG properly thanx, deepak
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
