Message190430
| Author | terry.reedy |
|---|---|
| Recipients | Todd.Rovito, r.david.murray, roger.serwy, terry.reedy |
| Date | 2013-05-31.23:50:02 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1370044203.06.0.895744280816.issue18104@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
What I want is for the tests to be discovered when they should be and not when they should not ;-) -- without jumping through too many hoops. I probably once read 'recursing into subdirectories' but forgot. I like 'h_test...' for 'human test ...'.
Thinking about it more, unittest does not not add much to this type of test. If dialogs maps dialog to test information used by h_test_dialog, then a first draft of testing all (there are 6 that I know of, 3 with display tests) could amount to
def h_test_dialogs():
for dialog in dialogs:
h_test_dialog(dialog)
New entries to dialogs would be 'discovered' as added. |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2013-05-31 23:50:03 | terry.reedy | set | recipients: + terry.reedy, roger.serwy, r.david.murray, Todd.Rovito |
| 2013-05-31 23:50:03 | terry.reedy | set | messageid: <1370044203.06.0.895744280816.issue18104@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2013-05-31 23:50:03 | terry.reedy | link | issue18104 messages |
| 2013-05-31 23:50:02 | terry.reedy | create | |