Raymond Hettinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment: See http://bugs.python.org/issue2249 for discussion.
Personally, I prefer minimalism and would like the API thinned considerably. Also, I don't think all of the classes should be exposed. AFAICT, nobody cares about test suite objects, test result objects, and test loader objects. These are really artifiacts of an implementation originally designed to demonstrate how a unittest suite could be implemented. In Kent Beck's book on Test Driven Development, he complains that most unittest implementations spawned from his original work have grown far too complicated and would be better served by sticking to a simple framework for writing and running tests. Some of that may have been lost in a effort to model J-Unit or to expose all the parts in support of people who want to use subclassing to write their own unittest variants and extensions (I have seen this in practice but it is somewhat rare). If making big changes to the unittest API is on the table, it is worth considering alternatives like py.test which is more powerful, easier to learn, much less verbose, and more in line with the way python is usually written. __________________________________ Tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://bugs.python.org/issue2578> __________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com