"Steve Holden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | Aldo Cortesi wrote: | > Thus spake Kay Schluehr ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
**tweet** <Time out> | >> Aldo, when you confuse inheritance ( using an OO framework properly ) | >> with monkey patching no one can draw much different conclusions than I | >> did. | > | > I guess you do always run the risk of being pelted with something from | > the peanut gallery when you release something in public - Yes, Guido gets attacked too. | > maybe I'll think twice about doing so next time. As did I. But I hope you continue to share. | > The only "confused" person here is you - I still say that it is NOT | > possible to provide the functionality Pry does by extending unittest in | > any sane way. Now, if you don't agree with this, please prove me wrong | > through reasoned argument or shut up. Do NOT, however, accuse me of not | > knowing what inheritance or monkeypatching is unless you want to look | > stupid and make my killfile. | > | >> But raving against unittest.py and anti-hyping it for mostly trivial | >> reasons and with shallow reasoning has become a fashion. Let's see.. Aldo shares his project. Someone asks why he did what he did. He explains. And you call this raving. To me, that is unfair and a mischaracterization of his intent and action. |>> Now we see | >> alternatives that do little more than what can be achieved by adding | >> two abstract methods to the TestSuite base class and overwrite a few | >> methods of the TestLoader base class ( maybe I'm wrong about it but I | >> guess the discussion has become too heated to clarify this point using | >> technical arguments ). The real proof would be code that does what you claim. | >> I just felt it was a good opportunity to debunk this unittest.py anti- | >> hype. I'm sorry it has gone too personal. I gather that you were irritated at 'raving unittest.py anti-hype' before Aldo wrote a word here. Perhaps 'debunking' would go better in a separate thread that was not aimed at anyone in particular. | > You can choose to use Pry or not, as you please. I would, however, ask | > that you stop whining incessantly about how it's not compatible with | > YOUR favourite framework, despite the fact that compatibility would | > gain YOU very little and ME nothing at all. As I said in my response to | > Michele, you lose the benefits of compatibility as soon as your tests | > use any of the features an extension might add. To me, this means the | > burden is not worth it. Since I designed and wrote Pry, I get to make | > that choice, not you, and the type of feeble, offensive "argument" | > you've provided is unlikely to change my mind. | Unpleasantly personal replies of this type are unwelcome here. Please | restrict your arguments to technical ones or refrain from posting. Steve, Kay is the one who started and repeated 'unpleasantly personal replies'. You should better have addressed her. | Kay at least has a long history as a contributor in this group, so | people know how to interpret her remarks and know that her contributions | are made on the basis of a deep understanding of Python. She is far from | belonging to the "peanut gallery", and to suggest otherwise betrays | either ignorance, arrogance, or both. | | As a newcomer, however, your responses make you seem to be complaining | that the world isn't grateful for your contributions, yet you don't seem | to even consider the possibility that might be happening because you | aren't explaining them well enough. To truculently suggest that reasoned | responses make you less likely to contribute to open source in future | suggests that you weren't ready to start in the first place. So you, as an old-timer, excuse the old-timer for starting a spat and scold the newcomer for responding. To me, that smells. **Tweet** <Time in> Terry Jan Reedy Another old-timer, with a long history of contributions also. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
