holger krekel wrote: > Hi Philippe, > > your described use case makes lots of sense to me. > > I coded an example which i hope fits it. > > It uses the new "local plugins" (i.e. plugins defined in a > conftest.py) and funcargs, if you don't know about them > yet i hope this is good to skim/read first: > http://codespeak.net/py/trunk/test/funcargs.html > > Here is the example: > > http://bitbucket.org/hpk42/py-trunk/src/tip/example/funcarg/lazysetup/ > > using py-trunk (probably also works with the 1.0.0b1, haven't checked) > in the lazysetup directory you can now do > > py.test sub1 # will wait 5 seconds because test > # functions access the setup defined in > # conftest.py > > py.test sub2 # will immediately run as the "setup" > # funcarg is not requested > > The idea for this conftest.py implementation is simple: > setup the funcarg when first needed and only tear it down > when the test process exits. > > does this make sense to you? feel free to play around > and ask questions - I'd then put the above example into > the "tutorial" example section of the funcarg doc. > > One advantage of the above approach is that you do not > need to do anything in your test modules anymore > (no boilerplate importing of setup_module etc.) > than requesting the object you want to setup. > I am reviving this old thread.
Honestly, I haven't tried the funcargs based solution that you propose. The reasons are : - I would really prefer to have setup/teardown at directory level and your solution is more per-session level - I don't like the idea of modifying 100 tests just to get a setup/teardown effect - I still find funcargs a bit cumbersome as explained in my other mail. I had a quick look at the plugin architecture to see if I could implement an equivalent of setup/teardown at directory level, but I don't think it's possible. Can you consider this as a feature request ? cheers, Philippe _______________________________________________ py-dev mailing list py-dev@codespeak.net http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/py-dev
