On 03/27/2011 05:13 PM, Martin Aspeli wrote:
> On 27 March 2011 15:54, Uli Fouquet<u...@gnufix.de>  wrote:
>> The (limited) experiences with py.test, however, were awesome. Some
>> points that are quite cool IMHO:
>> - Easy finding of tests: just write some ``test_function`` in a
>>   ``test_module`` and it will be found and executed. That also makes
>>   py.test tests more readable and maybe more intuitive.
> I'm not sure this is always a good idea. It feels a bit implicit, and
> having a base class isn't really a big problem, IMHO. It seems a bit
> like the kind of thing that sounds cool (look, it's even easier!), but
> in practice makes little difference.

Belatedly adding my few cents here: in practice I quite enjoy not having 
to copy ugly boilerplate from test modules that I always always forget.

It's actually nice to just write a test_* function and have the test 
runner just work.

So it's cool for some people, namely me.



Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

Reply via email to