[TIP] General purpose testing frameworks
robertc at robertcollins.net
Mon Dec 21 03:10:38 PST 2009
On Mon, 2009-12-21 at 13:09 +0530, Noufal Ibrahim wrote:
> Hello everyone,
> II've been doing some googling and have found subunit which can, as
> far as I can tell, decouple the test results from the harness. If I
> can convert my tests to use this, I can write a single harness to
> interpret the subunit results and produce a report. It's a 'component'
> rather than a full fledged test harness though.
If you hadn't mentioned it, I would have suggested subunit - that
decoupling is precisely what it is intended to support. While it is cast
in a 'unit test' sense, there isn't anything intrinsically unit-test
about it: it can represent pretty much any test, and with 0.0.4's
mime-type attachment support, binary data (such as a failing ROM) if
> I've also found pandokia which is interesting and I'm trying it out
> right now.
One thing you could do fairly trivially is glue subunit and pandokia
together with a subunit2pandokia filter, though you could also write
tools to generate pandokia output directly. Subunit's C / C++ / shell &
TAP bindings may be of assistance to your low level test developers
though, whereas you'd need to write custom core for pandokia regardless.
> The requirement though seems quite natural and I get the feeling
> that there's something obvious that I'm overlooking. Most of the
> searches I do give me tools that are specific to 'unit testing' python
> applications which is not what I'm trying to do.
I wouldn't get too mislead by terminology. The main difference between
unit and other test suites is in the execution, which you'll be
substituting with your custom tests regardless.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
More information about the testing-in-python