On Mar 10, 2008, at 17:57 , Wichert Akkerman wrote:
Previously Tres Seaver wrote:
Gary Poster wrote:
Also, some variety of doctest would be nice. Even when a package is
not using doctests, I add new tests as doctest unless there's a
really
good reason not to.
Becuase they make for poor unit tests? Using them to document the
"mainline" use cases for an API is one thing: using them to do
thorough
coverage of edge cases is quite another. I find that for the latter,
they fail *both* as documentation *and* as tests: their value as
documentation drops as the amount of scaffoldiing rises, and the
lack of
isolation between tests sharply reduces their value for testing the
corners.
I realize I have said this before, but then others keep urging the
"doctests everywhere" meme.
Indeed, and for that reason this can't be said enough. Doctests are
useful to create testable documentation. They are not the right tool
to
create isolated, debuggable tests.
Amen to that. Doctests are a useful testing tool, but no single tool
can fit every situation.
jens
_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
