On 29 May 2013 17:48, holger krekel <[email protected]> wrote: > agreed. One a sidenote, yesterday i introduced a briefer way to > specify argument names. Your example would start like this: > > @pytest.mark.parametrize("wx,expectedCoverage,expectedTrend", ...) > > and you can also have spaces after the commas if you prefer. >
I noticed that :) looks good. I think of parametrize like specifying namedtuples so it is a good improvement. > I'd recommend to write a wrapper "@myparametrize" which generates a > pytest.mark.parametrize() instance in the end. This way you could use > and consolidate your API ideas in real life with today's pytest in real > life before aiming for pytest inclusion. > Great idea. I discussed my idea with my workmate and he immediately suggested I use a dictionary, with the key being the test name and the value being the argvalue (test data). In doing that the test order is not guaranteed, but one could use an OrderedDict I suppose if that was important. I have put up a working example here for anyone who is interested: https://gist.github.com/pfctdayelise/5719730 cheers Brianna -- They've just been waiting in a mountain for the right moment: http://modernthings.org/
_______________________________________________ Pytest-dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pytest-dev
