On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 11:26 PM, Dwight Hutto <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 10:59 PM, Aaron Brady <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I've developing a test script. There's a lot of repetition. I want to
>> introduce a strategy for approaching it, but I don't want the program to be
>> discredited because of the test script. Therefore, I'd like to know what
>> people's reactions to and thoughts about it are.
>>
>> The first strategy I used created an iterator and advanced it between each
>> step:
>
> That isn't a refined iterator below:
What I mean is look at the similarities, and the differences, then
replace the differences with interpolation, in eval even.
>
>> self.op_chain(range(5), ('add', 5))
>> self.op_chain(range(5), ('add', -2), ('add', -1))
>> self.op_chain(range(5), ('discard', -1), ('add', 5))
>> self.op_chain_ok(range(5), ('update', [0, 1]))
>> Etc.
>>
>> I'm considering something more complicated. 'iN' creates iterator N, 'nN'
>> advances iterator N, an exception calls 'assertRaises', and the rest are
>> function calls.
iN = [N for N in range(0,5)]
>> dsi= dict.__setitem__
>> ddi= dict.__delitem__
>> dsd= dict.setdefault
>> KE= KeyError
>> IE= IterationError
>> self.chain(range(10), 'i0', (dsi, 0, 1), 'n0', (dsi, 10, 1), (IE,
>> 'n0'))
>> self.chain(range(10), 'i0', 'n0', (dsd, 0, 0), 'n0', (dsd, 10, 1),
>> (IE, 'n0'))
>> self.chain(range(10), 'i0', (KE, ddi, 10), 'n0', (ddi, 9), (IE,
>> 'n0'))
>>
>> Do you think the 2nd version is legible? Could it interfere with the
>> accuracy of the test?
Define the 2nd version
>
> Show the test, which should show instances of what you want called.
>
> I could rewrite the above, but it seems you're more in need of refining
> your iterations, and the values given within them.
>
--
Best Regards,
David Hutto
CEO: http://www.hitwebdevelopment.com
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
