unittest wart/bug for assertNotEqual

[Ethan Furman]

Gabriel Genellina wrote:
> En Tue, 20 Oct 2009 19:57:19 -0300, Ethan Furman <ethan at stoneleaf.us>  
> escribió:
>> Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>>> On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 14:45:49 -0700, Zac Burns wrote:
> 
>>>> My preference would be that failIfEqual checks both != and ==. This is
>>>> practical, and would benefit almost all use cases. If "!=" isn't "not
>>>> ==" (IEEE NaNs I hear is the only known use case)
> 
>>>   numpy uses == and != as element-wise operators:
> 
>> Two issues:  1) Sounds like we should have two more Asserts --  
>> failIfNotEqual, and assertNotNotEqual to handle the dichotomy in 
>> Python;  and 2) Does this mean (looking at Mark Dickinson's post) that 
>> 2.7 and  3.1 are now broken?
> 
> 1) assertEqual and assertNotEqual test for == and != respectively. The  
> failXXX methods are being deprecated. Why do you think we need more  
> asserts?

Ignorance, of course.  :)  I didn't know those were there.  Hopefully 
the OP will also now realize those are there.

> 2) Not exactly, but there are still inconsistencies (e.g. 
> assertDictEqual  and assertMultiLineEqual use != instead of ==, and some 
> assertion messages  use the wrong terminology)