On 2 Apr., 06:38, Aldo Cortesi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Ben, > > > > We are happy to announce the first release of Pry, a unit testing > > > framework. > > > Thanks for the announcement, and for the software. > > > If Pry is already incompatible with xUnit (i.e. Python's 'unittest'), > > could we please have names that adhere to the Python style guide > > <URL:www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0008>? > > > In particular the method names 'setUp', 'setUpAll', 'tearDown', > > 'tearDownAll' don't comply with the style guide. Compliant names for > > those methods would be 'set_up', 'set_up_all', etc. > > Keeping fixture setUp and tearDown names the same makes the transition > from unittest to pry easier. At the moment, converting to pry is very > simple - inherit your suites from AutoTree, rewrite tests to use > assertions, and then instantiate your suites at the end of the module. > Voila! You have a nice command-line interface, coverage analysis, and > an easy path to saner, better-engineered unit tests.
But you could have added the integration of code coverage and other helpful features with unittest as a conservative extension giving everyone a chance to use it directly with existing tests instead of forcing them to rewrite their tests for bike shading purposes. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
