[TIP] RFC: additional data in unittest TestResult outcomes

[Robert Collins]

On Tue, 2009-09-22 at 12:59 +0100, Michael Foord wrote:
> Robert Collins wrote:
> > 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.startTest(self)
> > result.addSuccess(self)
> > result.addSkipped(self, "haha")
> > result.stopTest(self)
> >
> > mean.
> >   
> Really? They seem pretty clear to me.

Imagine that you saw that sequence of calls in a trace :) [I wasn't
listing the interface, but showing one of the extremely odd things I've
seen]

> > This stuff is what 'unittest ain't broke, lets fix it' was aiming at.
> >
> >   
> 
> It's a real shame I was scheduled to be speaking at the same time during 
> EuroPython. :-(

Thats ok - I wasn't able to make it anyhow, Jml did a great talk though
- we worked on some of the slides together to kick start it:
http://code.mumak.net/2009/07/unittest-it-aint-broke-lets-fix-it.html

> Are you submitting the talk to PyCon?

I hadn't, I'm hoping to do a lightning talk at PyConNZ. When is PyCon?

-Rob
-------------- 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/20090922/1c7029b8/attachment.pgp