> I believe Ka-Ping once proposed something similar. This also jives > nicely with the "verify" functionality that I mentioned. However, I > don't know how easy it will be to write such compliance tests given > that typically the constructor signature is not part of the ability. > It may be more pragmatic to put the tests in a separate unit testing > module that can be subclassed by unit testing code for classes that > want specific claims to be verified.
Well, suppose we invent an ability that indicates compliance with a unit-test protocol. Objects that have this ability have a method or methods that can be used to test the object, to the extend that the author wants to render it testable. Then the verify functionality could, as a matter of convention, self-test all objects that claim to be auditable, without the verifier having to know the details. _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list Python-3000@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
