Raymond Hettinger wrote:
From: "Ben Finney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Right, so I'm putting up a separate PEP just for the renaming. Should
be arriving on this list soon.
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:
http://aspn.activestate.com/ASPN/Cookbook/Python/Recipe/572194
Raymond
+1 for a simpler testing module.
Just letting you know there is interest in a lighter weight testing suite.
Looking at the unittest discussions, it doesn't look like it is getting
easier to use, but more complex. Py.test looks very interesting, especially
the test discovery parts. I also agree we don't need special methods for
every variation of assertedness.
I've been thinking that a few decorators may go a long way to making
writing tests easy. It also reduces the level of indentation needed.
Ron
_______________________________________________
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
