Sorry. I had not finished the previous message
On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 1:55 PM, Olemis Lang <ole...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 1:29 PM, Olemis Lang <ole...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 11:42 AM, Michael Foord
>> <fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk> wrote:
>>> Hello all,
>>>
>>> Several
>>> authors of other Python testing frameworks spoke up *against* them, but
>>> several *users* of test frameworks spoke up in favour of them. ;-)
>>>
>>
>> +1 for having something like that included in unittest
>>
>>> I'm pretty sure I can introduce setUpClass and setUpModule without breaking
>>> compatibility with existing unittest extensions or backwards compatibility
>>> issues
>>
>> Is it possible to use the names `BeforeClass` and `AfterClass` (just
>> to be make it look similar to JUnit naming conventions ;o) ?
>>
>
> Another Q:
>
> - class setup method will be a `classmethod` isn't it ? It should not be
> a regular instance method because IMO it is not bound to a particular
> `TestCase` instance.
>
- Is it possible to rely on the fact that all class-level tear down
methods will be guaranteed to run even if class-level setup
method throws an exception ?
--
Regards,
Olemis.
Blog ES: http://simelo-es.blogspot.com/
Blog EN: http://simelo-en.blogspot.com/
Featured article:
PEP 391 - Please Vote! -
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/TracGViz-full/~3/hY2h6ZSAFRE/110617
_______________________________________________
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
