[Patches] [ python-Patches-736962 ] Port tests to unittest (Part 2)
SourceForge.net
noreply@sourceforge.net
Mon, 16 Jun 2003 12:09:08 -0700
Patches item #736962, was opened at 2003-05-13 05:45
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by rhettinger
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=305470&aid=736962&group_id=5470
Category: Tests
Group: None
Status: Open
Resolution: Accepted
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Walter Dörwald (doerwalter)
Assigned to: Brett Cannon (bcannon)
Summary: Port tests to unittest (Part 2)
Initial Comment:
Here are the next test scripts ported to PyUnit:
test_winsound and test_array. For test_array many
additional tests have been added (code coverage is at 91%)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
>Comment By: Raymond Hettinger (rhettinger)
Date: 2003-06-16 14:09
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=80475
Walter, there is one failure left:
======================================
================================
FAIL: test_time (__main__.PosixPathTest)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
---
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "test_posixpath.py", line 125, in test_time
self.assert_(
File "C:\PY23\lib\unittest.py", line 268, in failUnless
if not expr: raise self.failureException, msg
AssertionError
Brett, after Walter revises the patch, just load the patch and
make sure the test runs on the Mac. Between the three of
us, we can validate the suite on three different platforms.
Cheers.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Brett Cannon (bcannon)
Date: 2003-06-16 13:20
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=357491
Just wanting to work me like a dog, huh, Raymond? =)
And to clarify for my and Walter's benefit, when you say guards,
you mean that the tests don't crap out and say they failed on
Windows, right? I thought posixpath was not meant to work
under Windows.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Walter Dörwald (doerwalter)
Date: 2003-06-16 13:09
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=89016
I didn't realize that test_posixpath must work on Windows
too. Here's a new version.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Raymond Hettinger (rhettinger)
Date: 2003-06-16 11:04
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=80475
The previous comment applied to another patch.
It should have said:
Assigning to Brett to make sure the patch runs on the Mac.
Don't accept this one until it has guards that allow the tests
to run on Windows.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Raymond Hettinger (rhettinger)
Date: 2003-06-16 10:59
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=80475
Assigning to Brett to give experience doing a detail review on
this type of change.
* examine every line of the diff and consider whether there is
any semantic change (exceptions raised, etc).
* apply the diff and run the test suite
* in the interactive mode, call-up each function and make
sure it behaves as expected (this is necessary because the
test coverage is very low).
* verify that the whitespace has been cleaned up.
* look for missing changes (such as use of +=)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Raymond Hettinger (rhettinger)
Date: 2003-06-16 10:44
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=80475
The test file now has dependencies that do not apply to
windows. The failure messages are attached.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Walter Dörwald (doerwalter)
Date: 2003-06-16 07:48
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=89016
Here's the next one: test_posixpath.py with many additional
tests.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Walter Dörwald (doerwalter)
Date: 2003-05-22 12:33
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=89016
Checked in as:
Lib/test/output/test_mimetools delete
Lib/test/test_mimetools.py 1.4
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Raymond Hettinger (rhettinger)
Date: 2003-05-22 11:18
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=80475
test_mimetools.py is ready.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Walter Dörwald (doerwalter)
Date: 2003-05-22 10:05
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=89016
I've attached a third version of test_mimetools.py that does
some checks for the mimetools.Message class.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Raymond Hettinger (rhettinger)
Date: 2003-05-21 08:04
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=80475
Attaching a slightly modified test_mimetools which covers
more encodings and has a stronger set test.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Walter Dörwald (doerwalter)
Date: 2003-05-18 18:46
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=89016
Agreed, this is too much magic for too little gain.
Back to business: Here is test_mimetools ported to PyUnit.
Tests for mimetools.Message are still missing. If you can
think of any tests please add them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Raymond Hettinger (rhettinger)
Date: 2003-05-17 22:18
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=80475
Get the module with sys.modules:
tests = test_support.findtestclasses(sys.modules
[__name__])
test_support.unittest(*tests)
Yeah, the inheritance thing is a problem. I was trying to
avoid having to modify unittest.TestCase to have a
metaclass. The control of the module is kept in a
separate SF project and one of its goals is to be backward
compatible through 1.5.2 (meaning no metaclasses).
A possible workaround is to define a modified testcase in
test_support so that people don't import unittest directly
anymore:
test_support.py
-------------------------
import unittest
class SmartTestCase(unittest.TestCase):
__metaclass__ = autotracktests
pass
test_sets.py
------------------
class TestBasicOps(test_support.SmartTestCase):
run = False
. . .
class TestBasicOpsEmpty(TestBasicOps):
def setUp(self):
. . .
Still, this is starting to seem a bit magical and tricky.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Walter Dörwald (doerwalter)
Date: 2003-05-17 21:52
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=89016
But how do I pass the module object from inside the module?
And skipping abstract classes seems to be more work in this
version: If skipping is done via a class attribute, derived
classes have to explicitely reset this flag because of
interitance.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Raymond Hettinger (rhettinger)
Date: 2003-05-17 20:59
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=80475
Good call.
Instead of using metaclasses, perhaps add a module
introspector function to test_support:
def findtestclasses(mod):
tests = []
for elem in dir(mod):
member = getattr(mod, elem)
if type(member) != type: continue
if issubclass(member, unittest.TestCase):
tests.append(member)
return tests
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Walter Dörwald (doerwalter)
Date: 2003-05-17 20:45
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=89016
But this can be solved with a special non-inheritable class
attribute:
class BaseTest(unittest.TestCase):
run = False
Then the metaclass can do the following:
def __new__(cls, name, bases, dict):
if "run" not in dict:
dict["run"] = True
cls = type.__new__(cls, name, bases, dict)
if cls.run:
tests.append(cls)
return cls
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Raymond Hettinger (rhettinger)
Date: 2003-05-17 20:04
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=80475
I don't think metaclasses or module introspection would
help whenever there are classes that derive from TestCase
but are not meant to be run directly (their subclasses have
the setup/teardown/or class data). test_sets.py has
examples of that kind of thing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Walter Dörwald (doerwalter)
Date: 2003-05-17 19:50
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=89016
Checked in as:
Lib/test/test_array.py 1.20
Lib/test/test_winsound.py 1.5
Lib/test/output/test_winsound delete
> The approach of using tests.append() is elegant and
> makes it easier to verify that no tests are being omitted.
The most elegant approach would probably be a metaclass that
collects all TestCase subclasses that get defined. Classes
that only serve as a base class could be skipped by
specifying a certain class attribute.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Raymond Hettinger (rhettinger)
Date: 2003-05-17 18:35
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=80475
The approach of using tests.append() is elegant and
makes it easier to verify that no tests are being omitted.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=305470&aid=736962&group_id=5470