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-March/077832.html below:

[Python-Dev] unittest's redundant assertions: asserts vs. failIf/Unlesses

[Python-Dev] unittest's redundant assertions: asserts vs. failIf/Unlesses [Python-Dev] unittest's redundant assertions: asserts vs. failIf/UnlessesMichael Urman murman at gmail.com
Wed Mar 19 18:12:17 CET 2008
On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 10:44 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull
<stephen at xemacs.org> wrote:
>  So we should add this to 2to3, no?  They're going to run that anyway.

If 2to3 can handle this, that removes the larger half of my objection.
I was under the impression that this kind of semantic inferencing was
beyond its capabilities. But even if so, maybe it's safe to assume
that those names aren't used in other contexts.

My remaining smaller half of the objection is that these aliases
appear to have been added to reduce the friction when moving from
another unit test system. Since the exact names are as much a matter
of muscle memory as anything else being changed by py3k, that's not
very important in this context.

I still don't see the benefit paying for the cost. Are people
genuinely confused by the plethora of names for the operations
(instead of by their occasional "misuse")? But I'm not the one
offering a patch here, so I'll pipe down now. :)
-- 
Michael Urman
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