[issue28911] Clarify the behaviour of assert_called_once_with

STINNER Victor added the comment: New changeset 55b82e10dc6b75b30a72fa56beb60eaf54a008d4 by Victor Stinner (Arne de Laat) in branch '3.6': bpo-28911: Clarify the behaviour of assert_called_once_with. (#252) https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/55b82e10dc6b75b30a72fa56beb60eaf54a008d4

[issue28911] Clarify the behaviour of assert_called_once_with

STINNER Victor added the comment: New changeset 324c5d8ca6ed1c964d3b20e5762139ec65c7827c by Victor Stinner (Arne de Laat) in branch 'master': bpo-28911: Clarify the behaviour of assert_called_once_with. (#251) https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/324c5d8ca6ed1c964d3b20e5762139ec65c7827c

[issue28911] Clarify the behaviour of assert_called_once_with

STINNER Victor added the comment: New changeset fa30453568ae71861aa1928373bd76da4f3a33f6 by Victor Stinner (Arne de Laat) in branch '3.5': bpo-28911: Clarify the behaviour of assert_called_once_with. (#254) https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/fa30453568ae71861aa1928373bd76da4f3a33f6

[issue28911] Clarify the behaviour of assert_called_once_with

Changes by Berker Peksag : -- nosy: -153957 resolution: -> fixed stage: patch review -> resolved status: open -> closed ___ Python tracker

[issue28911] Clarify the behaviour of assert_called_once_with

Changes by Arne de Laat : -- pull_requests: +222 ___ Python tracker ___ ___

[issue28911] Clarify the behaviour of assert_called_once_with

Changes by Arne de Laat : -- pull_requests: +220 ___ Python tracker ___ ___

[issue28911] Clarify the behaviour of assert_called_once_with

Changes by Arne de Laat : -- pull_requests: +219 ___ Python tracker ___ ___

[issue28911] Clarify the behaviour of assert_called_once_with

STINNER Victor added the comment: Can you please try to write a pull request? https://docs.python.org/devguide/pullrequest.html -- ___ Python tracker ___

[issue28911] Clarify the behaviour of assert_called_once_with

Arne de Laat added the comment: *ping* Is this patch acceptable as is? Perhaps a new issue can be made for a method to check at most one call with a specific signature i.e. `assert_one_call_with`. -- ___ Python tracker

[issue28911] Clarify the behaviour of assert_called_once_with

Arne de Laat added the comment: Unfortunately there cant be commas in the method name, that would clarify the name. It should be read as 'assert called once, with ...' not 'assert called once with ...'. I have often used the method to test something was called only once, and with the

[issue28911] Clarify the behaviour of assert_called_once_with

Michael Foord added the comment: I like the documentation improvement, thank you. (The purpose of the method is to combine an assert about the arguments the method was called with and an assertion that it was only called once. To change the semantics would be both undesirable and backwards

[issue28911] Clarify the behaviour of assert_called_once_with

Lisa Roach added the comment: It took me a little while to wrap my brain around this, but you are definitely right that the documentation is not sufficient, your changes are an improvement. My wonder is, should we change the documentation or be looking at the code itself? I have always

[issue28911] Clarify the behaviour of assert_called_once_with

Changes by STINNER Victor : -- nosy: +haypo ___ Python tracker ___ ___

[issue28911] Clarify the behaviour of assert_called_once_with

Changes by Berker Peksag : -- nosy: +berker.peksag, michael.foord -153957 stage: -> patch review type: enhancement -> behavior versions: -Python 3.3, Python 3.4 ___ Python tracker

[issue28911] Clarify the behaviour of assert_called_once_with

New submission from Arne de Laat: The name assert_called_once_with and the current method documentation can be interpreted to mean that it asserts that there is precisely one call matching the given signature, regardless of the total number of calls. However, the method first checks that