Ben Finney writes: > > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > From: Antoine Pitrou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > That measured only usage of unittest *within the Python standard > library*. Is that the only body of unittest-using code we need > consider?
Yes, for the purposes of this PEP. We already know that many people want various different things. You want fail* /rather than/ assert*, but Steven d'Aprono wants /both/, and I prefer assert* /exclusively/. I don't see why we all shouldn't be satisfied[1], so the content of unittest should not set policy for our own projects. So there should be other modules (perhaps in the stdlib, perhaps not) to satisfy those preferences not catered to by stdlib's unittest. Thus this PEP should restrict it's concern to revising unittest to conform to PEPs and help standardize Python's own testing, without trying to impose standards on the whole community of Python users. That's my rationale. YMMV. Footnotes: [1] For myself, if the fail*-only proposal wins, I'd switch to that; fighting the tide on this isn't my idea of fun. But other assert* fans may be more faithful to their original preference. _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
