[TIP] Testing a daemon with coverage (nose)

Michael Foord fuzzyman at voidspace.org.uk
Sun May 10 04:59:13 PDT 2009

Ben Finney wrote:
> Laura Creighton <lac at openend.se> writes:
> [...]
>> It is interesting that you want tofind out if a new piece of code
>> broke an existing test as soon as possible. I don't. Because in the
>> world that I work in, when I run a new test run, and some old test
>> that I wasn't expecting to break, breaks, the most common reason is --
>> somebody else made a checkin which broke that test.
> Heh. I find, instead, that a common reason for breaking tests that
> previously worked is that my current local design conflicts with
> assumptions (or even explicit decisions) made elsewhere; which is
> exactly what the existing unit tests are intended to tell me. I'd much
> rather know that early so my local design can be corrected before I
> build further on a flawed design.
We often find that as well - especially as an application grows. 
Localised changes can cause unexpected breakage elsewhere; catching this 
is *exactly* the sort of benefit you get from having a good test suite!



More information about the testing-in-python mailing list