On 14 July 2015 at 20:27, Robert Collins <robe...@robertcollins.net> wrote: > Well. > > I'd go further and just separate the APIs. > > mock.assert_called_with(a_mock, *args, **kwargs) > > mock can know how to poke under the covers (e.g. using > __Mock_assert_called_with) without leaking it into the users objects.
As someone who makes limited use of mock, and therefore whose opinion shouldn't carry too much weight, I like this option. >> Given that it's way too late to take that path, I can see the value of >> trying to detect common errors. Particularly as the result of failing >> to do so is an apparently-passing test. > > We can add a new API and gradually deprecate the old one. With the > presence of 'mock' as a rolling backport, this can be used by folk on > Python 3.3 and 3.4 so they don't get locked into one release of Python > or another. You're right - I hadn't thought of this approach. >> In effect, this patch is "reserving" all attributes starting with >> "assert" or "assret" as actual methods of the mock object, and not >> mocked attributes. > > Yes, and thats ugly. OTOH it caught hundreds of useless tests in > OpenStack when this got ported into mock 1.1.0. ... which I guess counts as strong evidence that this *is* a common typo, at least in certain contexts. Paul _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
