[Peter Hansen] > (I'm not dissing py.test, and intend to check it > out.
Not to be disrepectful, but objections raised by someone who hasn't worked with both tools equate to hot air. > I'm just objecting to claims that unittest > somehow is "heavy", when those claiming that it > is seem to think you have to use TestSuites and > TestRunner objects directly... I think they've > overlooked the relatively lightweight approach > that has worked so well for me for four years...) Claiming? Overlooked? You do know that I wrote the example in unittest docs, the tutorial example, and hundreds of the test cases in the standard library. It is not an uninformed opinion that the exposed object model for unittest is more complex. As for "heaviness", it is similar to comparing alkaline AA batteries to lithium AA batteries. The first isn't especially heavy, but it does weigh twice as much as the latter. It only becomes a big deal when you have to carry a dozen battery packs on a hiking trip. My guess is that until you've written a full test suite with py.test, you won't get it. There is a distinct weight difference between the packages -- that was their whole point in writing a new testing tool when we already had two. When writing a large suite, you quick come to appreciate being able to use assert statements with regular comparision operators, debugging with normal print statements, and not writing self.assertEqual over and over again. The generative tests are especially nice. Until you've exercised both packages, you haven't helped the OP whose original request was: "Is there anybody out there who has used both packages and can give a comparative review?" Raymond -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
