On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 6:26 PM, Raymond Hettinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:. > > I would like to work with you or someone else who is interested > on an alternative PEP for a separate, simpler test module > using the py.test syntax. That is much simpler to learn and use. > Instead of self.assertIsNot and whatnot, you write: > assert a is not b > No need for tons of word-by-word spellings on things we already > have syntax for. Almost anyone who has used py.test can attest > its syntax is much more natural, easy to learn, easy to both > read and write, and is much lighter weight. I think some variant > of py.test could be done that is compatable with unittest > and the did not have the "magic" present in earlier versions of py.test. > I wrote a recipe (somewhat rough and incomplete) that shows how > easily this could be done:
Bringing the total amount of test modules in the stdlib to 3. OWTDI indeed. Anyway, I don't think something like needs to be (re)written. nose[1] is already an excellent implementation of this that I would like to see in the stdlib. [1] http://www.somethingaboutorange.com/mrl/projects/nose/ -- Cheers, Benjamin Peterson "There's no place like 127.0.0.1." _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
