Robert Collins <robe...@robertcollins.net> added the comment: Now, some refinements, as usual (for me at least) when considering a feature like this from an upstream perspective, where one's immediate use cases are just special cases not general case, I've come up with some refinements.
Firstly, I said you can infer starting. But its asymmetrical to have a 'run is finished' method that unittest will call, and not a 'run is about to start' method too. So I think we should have two methods, paired. This will avoid people having to write inference code themselves every time. Secondly, TestCase.run(None) creates a result. I think it would be good to make a clear statement about who, and when should and will call these two new methods. Something like: "Whomever calls 'start' is responsible for calling 'done'." Concretely this means that when TestCase implicitly creates a TestResult, it will call start, and also call done. Thirdly, naming. I'm agnostic, but I'd lean towards something clear, and something that can't be easily confused with startTest/stopTest. e.g. 'startTestRun' and 'stopTestRun' (just pluralising 'Test' to 'Tests' would be easily confusable). If this all makes sense, I'll write up some tests and put a patch together. I'm pasting this into the issue to, for folk that watch issues only :). ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue5728> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
