John W. added the comment: This also seems to apply to unittest.mock in Python3.4.
I described my similar issue on SO: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/42212433/what-is-wrong-with-this-simple-py-test-use-case It seems like it may be the same issue described here. For reference, this is my repro case: from unittest.mock import patch, call class Foo: def __init__(self): pass def my_method(self, value): pass def test_foo(): with patch('test.Foo', autospec=True) as MockFoo: m = MockFoo() m.my_method(123) MockFoo.assert_has_calls([call(), call().my_method(123)]) It fails with: ... E AssertionError: Calls not found. E Expected: [call(), call().my_method(123)] E Actual: [call(), call().my_method(123)] Which seems nonsensical to me. Removing the `value` parameter and the `123` arguments in the test makes it pass(!) ---------- nosy: +jwdevel versions: +Python 3.4 _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue26752> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
