On 27 Nov, 16:32, "Emanuele D'Arrigo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Nov 27, 5:00 am, Steven D'Aprano > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Refactor until your code is simple enough to unit-test effectively, then > > unit-test effectively. > > Ok, I've taken this wise suggestion on board and of course I found > immediately ways to improve the method. -However- this generates > another issue. I can fragment the code of the original method into one > public method and a few private support methods. But this doesn't > reduce the complexity of the testing because the number and complexity > of the possible path stays more or less the same. The solution to this > would be to test the individual methods separately, but is the only > way to test private methods in python to make them (temporarily) non > private? I guess ultimately this would only require the removal of the > appropriate double-underscores followed by method testing and then > adding the double-underscores back in place. There is no "cleaner" > way, is there?
Difficult to say without seeing the code. You could post it, perhaps. On the other hand a general recommendation from Programming Pearls (Jon Bentley) is to convert code to data structures. Maybe you could convert some of the code to decision tables or similar. James -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
