Ben Finney wrote:
Michael Foord <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Collecting testcases from the filesystem is a pain. But actually
writing tests (including custom TestCases) using the unittest API is
fine. I find unittest straightforward and readable, I like it.
I don't understand a lot of the criticism comes in for.
For my part, I wanted the redundancies removed and the PEP 8
conformance fixed as a precondition too *any* addition to the unittest
API.
Without those two (and the BDFL's pronouncement at the head of this
thread means they're not an option), I can't see the unittest API
getting anything except increasingly hideous and painful to use.
Yes, but unless I misunderstand you, you don't regard a mass renaming of
the module's functionality and removal of existing aliases as a change
to the API. As far as I'm concerned, if I have to alter my code to use
the updated module you have changed the API. Test code is particularly
sensitive to such changes.
regards
Steve
--
Steve Holden +1 571 484 6266 +1 800 494 3119
Holden Web LLC http://www.holdenweb.com/
_______________________________________________
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
