Christoph Zwerschke wrote: > > Is this 'consensus opinion' or mainly your own opinion? > > It is just a consequence from the fact that unittest is actually a port > from JUnit (Java) to Python, i.e. a consequence of trying to emulate a > standard framework that many programmers are already familiar with, > which is essentially not a bad idea. However, if you try to counterfeit > Java programming, your code won't be effective or elegant in Python.
comparing unittest to py.test (which is from the "almost too clever" school of pythonic engineering) might be illustrative: http://ianbicking.org/docs/pytest-presentation/pytest-slides.html (see the "why not unittest" slide for a list of issues with unittest) > > Is there a summary somewhere (in addition to the Zen of Python thingy) > > of what kinds of things are 'pythonic' and why they are considered so? > > I see it referred to a lot, and am starting to get a feel for it in > > some areas but not others. > > It's probably never been listed completely (and it also changes slowly > as the language evolves). it cannot be defined, per definition. a good approxmation is "pencil-like qualities". </F> -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list