Message181790
| Author | michael.foord |
|---|---|
| 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 | 2013-02-10.11:46:25 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1360496785.47.0.848210222048.issue16997@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
Subtests break the current unittest api of suite.countTests() and I fear they will also break tools that use the existing test result api to generate junit xml for continuous integration. I would like to add a "parameterized test" mechanism to unittest - but preferably in a way that doesn't break all the existing tools. |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2013-02-10 11:46:25 | michael.foord | set | recipients: + michael.foord, brett.cannon, spiv, exarkun, ncoghlan, pitrou, ezio.melotti, eric.araujo, Arfrever, r.david.murray, brian.curtin, hpk, fperez, chris.jerdonek, Yaroslav.Halchenko, santoso.wijaya, nchauvat, Julian, abingham, eric.snow, serhiy.storchaka, borja.ruiz, bfroehle |
| 2013-02-10 11:46:25 | michael.foord | set | messageid: <1360496785.47.0.848210222048.issue16997@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2013-02-10 11:46:25 | michael.foord | link | issue16997 messages |
| 2013-02-10 11:46:25 | michael.foord | create | |