[TIP] RFC: additional data in unittest TestResult outcomes

Robert Collins robertc at robertcollins.net
Tue Sep 22 04:53:47 PDT 2009

On Tue, 2009-09-22 at 12:42 +0100, Michael Foord wrote:

> I have a preference for adding a keyword argument over proliferating 
> methods. That's about my only comment at this point. :-)

I want to overhaul how we do outcomes too; we have too many methods and
its unclear what things like:
result.addSkipped(self, "haha")


Thoughts on how to solve this appreciated!

[I have another bunch of points; like I say, I need to write it all
up ;P]

I'll probably blog about the overall thing I want to achieve shortly;
I'll link it here.

This stuff is what 'unittest ain't broke, lets fix it' was aiming at.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.idyll.org/pipermail/testing-in-python/attachments/20090922/767a50b6/attachment.pgp 

More information about the testing-in-python mailing list