On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 4:50 PM, Ben Finney <ben+python at benfinney.id.au> wrote: > Michael Foord <michael at voidspace.org.uk> writes: > >> It seems to me that the same effect (always reporting test name) can >> be achieved in _TextTestResult.getDescription(). I propose to revert >> the change to TestCase.shortDescription() (which has both a horrible >> name and a horrible implementation and should probably be renamed >> getDocstring so that what it does is obvious but never mind) and put >> the change into _TextTestResult. > [...] > > I've overridden that method to provide better, more specific, test case > short descriptions, and the name works fine since I'm providing an > overridden implementation of “the short description of this test case”. Oh yes ! Thnx for mentioning that ! Very much ! If you move or remove shortDescription then I think dutest will be broken. In that case there is an automatically generated short description comprising the doctest name or id (e.g. class name + method name ;o) and example index (just remember that every interactive example is considered to be a test case ;o) In that case there is no other way to get this done unless an all-mighty & heavy test result be implemented . So I am *VERY* -1 for removing `shortDescription` (and I also think that TC should be the one to provide the short desc rather than the test result, just like what Ben Finney said before ;o) -- Regards, Olemis. Blog ES: http://simelo-es.blogspot.com/ Blog EN: http://simelo-en.blogspot.com/ Featured article: PEP 391 - Please Vote! - http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/TracGViz-full/~3/hY2h6ZSAFRE/110617
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4