On 20.10.2016 15:14, Bruno Oliveira wrote: > Hey Ronny, > > > On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 10:55 AM Ronny Pfannschmidt > <opensou...@ronnypfannschmidt.de > <mailto:opensou...@ronnypfannschmidt.de>> wrote: > >> b) Another suggestion from Ronny: running collection and getting >> used marker names. I'm not entirely sure what this means exactly, >> since the original proposal doesn't use "names" at all, only the >> objects directly. > in my proposal the "name" of a marker would be either the current > string or a type > > > I'm still not getting how that fits with the collection of *tests*... > consider this module: > > # contents of test_foo.py > from pytest_blocker import Blocker > > @Blocker(123) > def test_foo(): > pass > fist that usage is wrong, a *mark* object in my proposal is neither usable as decorator, nor aware of mark mechanism, it can literally be any object
a *mark* is orthogonal to the process of marking, mixing those 2 concepts just creates a huge mess after collection you have the test items, those have all the markers, from the markers of test items one can infer the markers used in the collected tests -- Ronny > How does pytest know that the file "test_foo" uses "Blocker", and that > "Blocker" is a marker? One possible solution would be to inspect the > namespace and see if any of the objects are a pytest.Mark subclass. > I'm not suggesting that, just trying to illustrate what I mean by my > question. > > another important part of my proposal is, that i want to decouple > from the namespace we put into pytest.mark, > after all there is now a multitude of plugins that register > certain markers, sometimes for *different* usages and incompatible > signatures > > > That's the "flat namespaces" part of the discussion, if I'm > understanding your proposal correctly. :) > > >> IMHO the discussion by email at this point is a little hard to >> digest and to track all points/replies/proposals. Perhaps we >> should move this discussion to a different venue? I propose an >> issue on GitHub because the main issue containing the proposal >> can be updated as the discussion progresses, although I'm not >> sure if it would be any easier to track the discussion itself. >> Perhaps using the Wiki would also be possible? >> > i could make a wiki page > > > I would like to see what others think first. People might be OK with > the current format, or have other suggestions. > > Cheers > Bruno.
_______________________________________________ pytest-dev mailing list pytest-dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pytest-dev
