On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 3:22 PM Robert Collins <robe...@robertcollins.net> wrote:
> On 15 July 2015 at 10:05, Ethan Furman <et...@stoneleaf.us> wrote: > > On 07/14/2015 02:53 PM, Robert Collins wrote: > ... > >>> I don't think unittest can protect its users from such things. > >> > >> > >> It can't, but there is a sliding scale of API usability, and we should > >> try to be up the good end of that :). > > > > > > I hope you're not suggesting that supporting misspellings, and thereby > > ruling out the proper use of an otherwise fine variable name, is at the > good > > end of that scale? > > I'm not supporting the misspelling thing - see my suggestion earlier > in this thread to move the mock assertions to standalone functions, > removing the bug in that area *entirely* and eventually removing the > check for method names starting with assert from mock entirely. > > What I am doing is rejecting the argument that because we can't fix > every mis-use users might make, we therefore should not fix the cases > where we can fix it. > > For clarity, I think we should: > - remove the assret check, it is I think spurious. > - add a set of functions to the mock module that should be used in > preference to Mock.assert* > - mark the Mock.assert* functions as PendingDeprecation > - in 3.6 move the PendingDeprecation to Deprecated > - in 3.7 remove the Mock.assert* functions and the check for method > names beginning with assert entirely. > +1 from me
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
