[issue30221] Deprecate assertNotAlmostEqual

2017-05-01 Thread Serhiy Storchaka
Serhiy Storchaka added the comment: If the absent of use cases is not good argument I close this issue. But this looks as a design mistake to me. -- resolution: -> wont fix stage: -> resolved status: open -> closed ___ Python tracker

[issue30221] Deprecate assertNotAlmostEqual

2017-05-01 Thread Robert Collins
Robert Collins added the comment: We've now spent more time debating the deprecation that we would have saved if it had been deprecated. Deprecations cost user good will. Whilst I very much want to delete all assertions in favour of matchers, which would allow composed symmetry rather than

[issue30221] Deprecate assertNotAlmostEqual

2017-05-01 Thread Serhiy Storchaka
Serhiy Storchaka added the comment: Google finds only 16 books for me. I have reviewed them, and all of them just list assertion methods, copying the official documentation or one other. Often the book contains just one mention of assertNotAlmostEqual (not including the contents and the

[issue30221] Deprecate assertNotAlmostEqual

2017-05-01 Thread Stefan Krah
Changes by Stefan Krah : -- nosy: -skrah ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list

[issue30221] Deprecate assertNotAlmostEqual

2017-05-01 Thread Stefan Krah
Stefan Krah added the comment: > Do these books have any use cases for assertNotAlmostEqual() or just > enumerate the list of TestCase methods? I think this should be researched by the proponent of the change. -- ___ Python tracker

[issue30221] Deprecate assertNotAlmostEqual

2017-05-01 Thread Serhiy Storchaka
Serhiy Storchaka added the comment: > Any peculiarity that applies to assertNotAlmostEqual also applies to > assertAlmostEqual, so I'm not sure how removing one but keeping the other > would simplify anything. There are use cases for assertAlmostEqual(). You can find examples in the CPython

[issue30221] Deprecate assertNotAlmostEqual

2017-05-01 Thread Stefan Krah
Stefan Krah added the comment: There are 100 results in Google books alone. Are the books wrong (honest question, I did not check)? They will be wrong if we remove it. ;) I agree with Michael that assertNotAlmostEqual() doesn't hurt. -- nosy: +skrah

[issue30221] Deprecate assertNotAlmostEqual

2017-05-01 Thread R. David Murray
R. David Murray added the comment: Not only is not something to be surprised about, it would be surprising for it to be absent. So the user cognitive overhead of removing it is quite possibly higher than that of it being there. -- nosy: +r.david.murray

[issue30221] Deprecate assertNotAlmostEqual

2017-05-01 Thread Antoine Pitrou
Antoine Pitrou added the comment: Any peculiarity that applies to assertNotAlmostEqual also applies to assertAlmostEqual, so I'm not sure how removing one but keeping the other would simplify anything. Furthermore, such symmetry between positive and negative asserts is widespread in the

[issue30221] Deprecate assertNotAlmostEqual

2017-05-01 Thread Serhiy Storchaka
Serhiy Storchaka added the comment: This will save time and memory of unittest users for reading the documentation, remembering it and trying to understand in which cases assertNotAlmostEqual() can be used. This will prevent them from using unsuitable method. I found only one case of using

[issue30221] Deprecate assertNotAlmostEqual

2017-05-01 Thread Antoine Pitrou
Antoine Pitrou added the comment: Agreed with Michael. -- nosy: +pitrou ___ Python tracker ___ ___

[issue30221] Deprecate assertNotAlmostEqual

2017-05-01 Thread Michael Foord
Michael Foord added the comment: I agree it's not *very* useful, but I don't see any benefit in getting rid of it either. -- ___ Python tracker ___

[issue30221] Deprecate assertNotAlmostEqual

2017-05-01 Thread Serhiy Storchaka
New submission from Serhiy Storchaka: The purpose of the assertNotAlmostEqual() method of TestCase is not clear. This method is never used in the CPython testsuite (except tests for it itself), it is never mentioned in the bug tracker (except one general issue about mass renaming methods in