[issue41734] Refactor b32{encode,decode} tests

Filipe Laíns added the comment: Friendly ping on this. -- ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe:

[issue41734] Refactor b32{encode,decode} tests

Paul Ganssle added the comment: I agree with Filipe here — I think the b32encode/b32decode tests were originally written before subtests were available, and this PR has this and other real improvements. I understand why you'd want to have a policy of "no refactoring for its own sake", but

[issue41734] Refactor b32{encode,decode} tests

Filipe Laíns added the comment: Yes, it is not needed, but it does provide a fair bit of enhancement. Using subtests makes more clear what failed when something fails. I am a bit confused, in PR 20441 I first just copied the current b32{encode,decode} tests but was given feedback which

[issue41734] Refactor b32{encode,decode} tests

Serhiy Storchaka added the comment: I think this change is not needed. The current code is shorter and works pretty well. -- nosy: +serhiy.storchaka resolution: -> rejected stage: patch review -> resolved status: open -> closed ___ Python tracker

[issue41734] Refactor b32{encode,decode} tests

Change by Filipe Laíns : -- keywords: +patch pull_requests: +21206 stage: -> patch review pull_request: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/22122 ___ Python tracker ___

[issue41734] Refactor b32{encode,decode} tests

New submission from Filipe Laíns : As discussed in https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/20441, these tests could be improved by using the same format of the b32hex{encode,decode} tests. -- components: Tests messages: 376468 nosy: FFY00, p-ganssle priority: normal severity: normal