Message180991
| Author | pitrou |
|---|---|
| Recipients | Arfrever, Julian, Yaroslav.Halchenko, abingham, bfroehle, borja.ruiz, brett.cannon, brian.curtin, chris.jerdonek, eric.araujo, eric.snow, exarkun, ezio.melotti, fperez, hpk, michael.foord, nchauvat, ncoghlan, pitrou, r.david.murray, santoso.wijaya, serhiy.storchaka, spiv |
| Date | 2013-01-30.20:22:28 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1359577177.3422.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> |
| In-reply-to | <1359576039.97.0.904659998915.issue16997@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| Content | |
|---|---|
> You didn't respond to the idea of exposing both features separately > after saying you didn't understand what I meant and saying that they > were pointless and didn't make sense. So I explained and also > proposed a specific API to make the suggestion clearer and more > concrete. Well, suffice to say that I wasn't convinced at all. There are multiple use cases for subtests in the Python test suite, but I can't think of any for your proposed API separation. That's why I find it uninteresting. I'm making this proposal to solve a concrete issue, not in the interest of minimalism. "Building block" was to be understood in that sense. Unit testing is one of those areas where purity is a secondary concern. |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2013-01-30 20:22:29 | pitrou | set | recipients: + pitrou, brett.cannon, spiv, exarkun, ncoghlan, ezio.melotti, eric.araujo, Arfrever, r.david.murray, michael.foord, brian.curtin, hpk, fperez, chris.jerdonek, Yaroslav.Halchenko, santoso.wijaya, nchauvat, Julian, abingham, eric.snow, serhiy.storchaka, borja.ruiz, bfroehle |
| 2013-01-30 20:22:29 | pitrou | link | issue16997 messages |
| 2013-01-30 20:22:28 | pitrou | create | |