[issue8038] Not all the new assert* unittest.TestCase methods have negative (not) equivalents

[Michael Foord]

New submission from Michael Foord <michael at voidspace.org.uk>:

Originally reported as a bug against unittest2: http://code.google.com/p/unittest-ext/issues/detail?id=3

There are some assert* methods that don't have their assertNot* 
counterparts. There's assertDictEqual, assertSequenceEqual, 
assertRegexpMatches, but no assertDictNotEqual, assertSequenceNotEqual, 
assertRegexpNotMatches, for example.

They should be present for the sake of completeness (I don't like to have to look into the docs to check if a method has a negative counterpart), but also because they ask for a custom output. For example, the error accompanying assertRegexpNotMatches could show the matching part of the text, which is the part that really interests me. assert_(re.match(...)) will only tell me that None is not true...

----------
assignee: michael.foord
components: Library (Lib)
messages: 100291
nosy: michael.foord
severity: normal
status: open
title: Not all the new assert* unittest.TestCase methods have negative (not) equivalents
type: behavior
versions: Python 2.7, Python 3.2

_______________________________________
Python tracker <report at bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue8038>
_______________________________________