On Feb 23, 2006, at 1:17 PM, Benji York wrote:
Chris McDonough wrote:
I dunno about sucking because they are quite good for
documentation, but I tend to write plain-old unittests instead of
doctests when I'm testing without any pretense towards writing
documentation. If you test internals of a class in a doctest,
the doctest body gets pretty cluttered, which tends to defeat the
documentation-esque-ness of them.
Are you talking about doctests in docstrings? If so, I definitely
see downsides to that use case. I was talking about doctests in
stand-alone text files. That's my (and several others) preferred
way of using them.
Either.
If you /were/ talking about stand-alone doctests, then I have no
idea what you're talking about. :)
It's just opinion, but for example, I don't think zope/wfmc/xpdl.txt
reads much better as a doctest than it would as a plain old
unittest. But it's of course a judgment call.
- C
_______________________________________________
Zope maillist - [email protected]
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
