New submission from Johan Tufvesson <j...@hms.se>:
In the unittest module, TestCase class:
If one wants to provide a more descriptive fail message compared to the
default, it is often valuable to be able to refer to the arguments
evaluated by the fail*- (or assert*-) method. This can be accomplished
by binding names to the evaluated values before the call to the
fail*-methods, and then providing a string with the values embedded as
needed. This, however, can be quite cumbersome when there are a lot of
calls to fail*-methods.
Today:
Arg1 = RealValue()
Arg2 = ExpectedValue()
self.failUnlessEqual(Arg1, Arg2, "Got {0}, but expected
{1}.".format(Arg1, Arg2))
Proposed solution:
In the fail*-methods, check if the msg argument is some kind of string
(basestring?), and run the format() method on the string with the
supplied arguments. This would result in code like this:
self.failUnlessEqual(RealValue(), ExpectedValue(), "Got {0}, but
expected {1}.")
----------
components: Library (Lib)
messages: 92977
nosy: tuben
severity: normal
status: open
title: Ability to refer to arguments in TestCase.fail* methods
type: feature request
versions: Python 2.7
_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue6966>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
