On 05/18/2016 08:35 AM, Thomas Mlynarczyk wrote:
On 18/05/16 17:21, Ned Batchelder wrote:
Ideally, an empty test wouldn't be a success, but I'm not sure how
the test runner could determine that it was empty. I guess it could
introspect the test function to see if it had any real code in it,
but I don't know of a test runner that does that.
Simple: a function which does not produce at least one "failure" or
"pass" does not test anything. No need to introspect the code. Just
check if the total score of failures and passes has changed after the
function was run.
Not so simple: I have tests that do nothing besides build objects. If
building the objects raises no errors the test passed.
Although, for the benefit of empty tests not passing I could add a
do-nothing assert:
self.assertTrue(created_obj)
(it's a do-nothing because if the object wasn't created the test would
have already failed).
--
~Ethan~
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
