> This makes no sense. If you ignore the output, the code could do ANYTHING
>
> and the test would still pass. Raise an exception? Pass. SyntaxError?
>
> Pass. Print "99 bottles of beer"? Pass.
>
if you try the commands, you can see that the tests fail..
for example
.. doctest::
>>> raise Exception("test")
will fail with this message:
File "utils.rst", line 5, in default
Failed example:
raise Exception("test")
Exception raised:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/lib/python2.7/doctest.py", line 1289, in __run
compileflags, 1) in test.globs
File "<doctest default[0]>", line 1, in <module>
raise Exception("test")
Exception: test
So to me this seems OK.. "Print" will fail as well...
>
>
> I have sometimes written unit tests that just check whether a function
>
> actually is callable:
>
>
>
> ignore = function(a, b, c)
>
>
>
> but I've come to the conclusion that is just a waste of time, since there
>
> are dozens of other tests that will fail if function isn't callable. But
>
> if you insist, you could always use that technique in your doctests:
>
>
>
> >>> ignore = function(a, b, c)
>
>
> If the function call raises, your doctest will fail, but if it returns
>
> something, anything, it will pass.
>
>
I understand your point, but now I am not writing unit tests to check the
correctness of the code. I am only writing a tutorial and assuming that
the code is correct. What I have to be sure is that the code in the tutorial
can be executed correctly, and some commands print verbose output which can
change.
It is not enough to write >>> ignore = function(a,b,c) won't work because the
function still prints messages on screen and this causes the failure of the
test...
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
