Mark Diekhans <ma...@kermodei.com> added the comment: Allowing loadTestsFromTestCase() to take either a testCaseClass or a (testCaseClass, param) tuple, where the param is then past to the __init__ function might do the trick. One param is sufficient, since it can be a container for any number of params. This allows more fields to be added to the tuple for some future, unforeseen need.
An container object for class and parameters would be a bit more structured than a tuple. A factory function would be the most flexible, however it seems to go against the class introspection for discovering tests. Then again, I don't know the code very well. R. David Murray <rep...@bugs.python.org> writes: > > R. David Murray <rdmur...@bitdance.com> added the comment: > > Maybe we could add a recipe for doing this to the load_tests docs? > > I don't think that load_tests is going to be more readable, though, since it > doesn't allow you to put the parameterization next to the class you are > parameterizing (unless you do some additional hackery). > > But yes, if anything else is done a concrete API proposal is the first > requirement. > > ---------- > > _______________________________________ > Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> > <http://bugs.python.org/issue12600> > _______________________________________ ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue12600> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
