Quote of the day

[Ned Batchelder]

On Wednesday, May 18, 2016 at 11:36:03 AM UTC-4, 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.

For test frameworks that use explicit assertion methods (unittest has
self.assertEqual, for example), that could work.  I'm not sure whether
py.test and the other "bare assert" frameworks have the instrumentation
to make that possible.

--Ned.