Larry Hastings added the comment:
So here's the thing. It only works in Python 3.3 because testtools depends on
internal implementation details of unittest, specifically a private exception
("unittest.case._UnexpectedSuccess"). The public interface still works fine.
So I don't think this is a regression. If testtools is willing to release
hacks depending on undocumented internal behavior, I don't think it's
unreasonable for them to rework their hack to support Python 3.4.
That said, it might be nice to not break testtools if we can avoid it.
Antoine: would it be reasonable to rework the implementation of subTest in a
way that permitted us to revert the changes to expectedFailure?
----------
_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue20687>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
