Jean-Paul Calderone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 19:26:09 +0200, Nikolaus Rath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Jean-Paul Calderone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 16:35:55 +0200, Nikolaus Rath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>Hello,
>>>>
>>>>I have a number of conceptually separate tests that nevertheless need
>>>>a common, complicated and expensive setup.
>>>>
>>>>Unfortunately, unittest runs the setUp method once for each defined
>>>>test, even if they're part of the same class as in
>>>>
>>>>class TwoTests(unittest.TestCase):
>>>> def setUp(self):
>>>> # do something very time consuming
>>>>
>>>> def testOneThing(self):
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> def testADifferentThing(self):
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>which would call setUp twice.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Is there any way to avoid this, without packing all the unrelated
>>>>tests into one big function?
>>>>
>>>
>>> class TwoTests(unittest.TestCase):
>>> setUpResult = None
>>>
>>> def setUp(self):
>>> if self.setUpResult is None:
>>> self.setUpResult = computeIt()
>>>
>>> ...
>>>
>>> There are plenty of variations on this pattern.
>>
>>
>>But at least this variation doesn't work, because unittest apparently
>>also creates two separate TwoTests instances for the two tests. Isn't
>>there some way to convince unittest to reuse the same instance instead
>>of trying to solve the problem in the test code itself?
>>
>
> Eh sorry, you're right, the above is broken. `setUpResult` should be
> a class attribute instead of an instance attribute.
Yeah, well, I guess that would work. But to me this looks really more
like a nasty hack.. isn't there a proper solution?
Best,
-Nikolaus
--
»It is not worth an intelligent man's time to be in the majority.
By definition, there are already enough people to do that.«
-J.H. Hardy
PGP fingerprint: 5B93 61F8 4EA2 E279 ABF6 02CF A9AD B7F8 AE4E 425C
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
