On May 24, 10:12 am, Roy Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In article > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > John Roth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Does the following patch has a chance of being introduced in the > > > standard python distribution? > > > I certainly hope not! > > I think you're being overly negative here. Antoon went to the trouble to > read the sources and post a diff. At the very least, he deserves a more > polite response. > > But, more than that, I think Antoon's idea has some merit. I understand > that the mantra in unit testing is that the tests should be able to be run > in any order. Still, it's the job of a library package to make it easy to > do things, not to enforce policy. If somebody (for whatever reason) has a > need to run their tests in a certain order, why is it our job to make it > hard for them to do that? > > In fact, unittest.defaultTestLoader *already* sorts the tests into > alphabetical order by their name. So, if somebody wanted to get the tests > run in order, they could just name their tests "test0001", "test0002", etc. > In fact, I've done that in the past when I had some (long forgotten) reason > why I wanted to run a bunch of things in order. Allowing the tests to be > sorted by line number order instead of by name just makes it a little > easier to do the same thing. > > If somebody wants that functionality, and is willing to put in the effort > to write the code to do it, and contribute that back to the community, I > don't see any reason why it shouldn't be considered. It would have to be > done in a way that doesn't change the current behavior (perhaps by shipping > a subclass of TestLoader which users could use instead of the default). > I'm not saying that we *need* to include it, just that it's not such a bad > idea that it deserves responses like "I certainly hope not!"
I totally agree. I can't relate to anyone that want to oppose a change that would give more freedom to a programmer. André -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list