On Sun, Mar 9, 2008 at 11:07 AM, Karlo Lozovina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jorge Vargas wrote:
>
> > well after all it's a function so the only ways you can get things out
> > of it are:
> > - return a dict with all the objects
> > - use global (very messy)
> > - use a decorator to do either of the above.
>
> Messy, all of those... :(.
>
>
> > on the other hand have you consider using a proper test package?
> > instead of inspecting the objects manually from the shell you could
> > make it all automatic. with assert statements. you could use the std.
> > python testing modules http://docs.python.org/lib/development.html or
> > something less verbosed like nose
>
> Usually, I'm using standard Python testing modules, but sometimes that is
> just an overkill. Sometimes I like to do 'exploratory programming',
> especially in the early phases of development - create a bunch of objects I
> want to play with and do that from IPython. Only way I found out to
> somewhat automate this procedure is to have a function that creates all of
> the test objects, and then raises an exception at the end. IPython starts
> ipdb, so I can work with the objects the function created (without copying
> them back to the shell). But this somehow looks too hack-ish for me, so I
> was wondering if there was an alternative...
>
ohhh if that is the case then what you are doing seems to be the
optimal. Just have module lvl code ran the testing in fact I don't
even put those into the if __name__, the reason is that this is just
temp testing that will later become real unit testing, and will never
hit a production app. it gives you the most flexibility.
> Anyway, thanks for your answer ;).
>
welcome
>
>
> --
> Karlo Lozovina -- Mosor
> --
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
>
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
