A RetroSearch Logo

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Search Query:

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-July/081316.html below:

[Python-Dev] light-weight testing

[Python-Dev] light-weight testing [Python-Dev] light-weight testingAntoine Pitrou solipsis at pitrou.net
Thu Jul 17 11:10:33 CEST 2008
Steven D'Aprano <steve <at> pearwood.info> writes:
> 
> I am interested in this suggestion. I didn't know about py.test.
> 
> I admit to dissatisfaction with unittest (too Java-ish and heavyweight 
> for my tastes). I would love a test suite midway in weight between 
> doctests and unittest, so I will check it out.
> 

For what it's worth, I've been using nose for quite a long time and the first 
reason I did so is, like you, because I wanted to write tests in a light way 
(without having to declare classes).

Then after writing some dozens of tests I switched back to wrapping tests in 
classes, just because it makes tests more readable and better organized 
(especially when you come to have setup/teardown functions shared by several 
tests).

(but nose is still very nice)

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list

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