In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Paul Rubin <http://[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I have noticed some distinctly funny and confused feelings I get when > > using the unittest module, stuff that feels clunky and odd about how it > > is set-up, however I thought that this was just due to *my personal* > > lack of understanding of the deep magic and sophisticated design > > patterns used in this module! > > > > If it turns out to be 'unpythonic' > > The unpythonicness stems from it being basically a reimplementation of > JUnit, which was designed for use with Java. JUnit, in turn, is based on a package first implemented in SmallTalk (http://www.xprogramming.com/testfram.htm). On stuff like this, I'm not opposed to things being slightly unpythonic. PyUnit does have some clunkyness to it, but there is some value in having all the unit test frameworks have a similar feel across languages. Unfortunately, it has become fashionable to call any sort of unit test framework "xxxUnit", whether or not it resembles the original or not. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
