| msg229731 - (view) |
Author: Antoine Pitrou (pitrou) *  |
Date: 2014-10-20 17:14 |
| I just got the following traceback when trying discover without 3.5. It runs fine under 3.4... $ ~/cpython/default/python -m unittest discover -v Traceback (most recent call last): File "/home/antoine/cpython/default/Lib/runpy.py", line 170, in _run_module_as_main "__main__", mod_spec) File "/home/antoine/cpython/default/Lib/runpy.py", line 85, in _run_code exec(code, run_globals) File "/home/antoine/cpython/default/Lib/unittest/__main__.py", line 18, in main(module=None) File "/home/antoine/cpython/default/Lib/unittest/main.py", line 93, in __init__ self.runTests() File "/home/antoine/cpython/default/Lib/unittest/main.py", line 244, in runTests self.result = testRunner.run(self.test) File "/home/antoine/cpython/default/Lib/unittest/runner.py", line 168, in run test(result) File "/home/antoine/cpython/default/Lib/unittest/suite.py", line 87, in __call__ return self.run(*args, **kwds) File "/home/antoine/cpython/default/Lib/unittest/suite.py", line 125, in run test(result) File "/home/antoine/cpython/default/Lib/unittest/suite.py", line 87, in __call__ return self.run(*args, **kwds) File "/home/antoine/cpython/default/Lib/unittest/suite.py", line 125, in run test(result) File "/home/antoine/cpython/default/Lib/unittest/suite.py", line 87, in __call__ return self.run(*args, **kwds) File "/home/antoine/cpython/default/Lib/unittest/suite.py", line 125, in run test(result) File "/home/antoine/cpython/default/Lib/unittest/case.py", line 625, in __call__ return self.run(*args, **kwds) File "/home/antoine/cpython/default/Lib/unittest/case.py", line 553, in run result.startTest(self) File "/home/antoine/cpython/default/Lib/unittest/runner.py", line 54, in startTest self.stream.write(self.getDescription(test)) File "/home/antoine/cpython/default/Lib/unittest/runner.py", line 47, in getDescription return '\n'.join((str(test), doc_first_line)) File "/home/antoine/cpython/default/Lib/unittest/case.py", line 1354, in __str__ self._testFunc.__name__) AttributeError: 'str' object has no attribute '__name__' |
|
|
| msg229732 - (view) |
Author: Michael Foord (michael.foord) * |
Date: 2014-10-20 17:16 |
| I assume you mean you get the error *with* 3.5 (not "without"). Does this happen *every time* (i.e. is it trivially reproducible) - or can you provide a repro? This is regression that I would *assume* (a totally lazy assumption) introduced by the new error handling code. |
|
|
| msg229733 - (view) |
Author: Antoine Pitrou (pitrou) * |
Date: 2014-10-20 17:19 |
| > I assume you mean you get the error *with* 3.5 (not "without"). Yes, sorry :-) > Does this happen *every time* (i.e. is it trivially reproducible) It happens with the llvmlite repository: https://github.com/numba/llvmlite Since using it requires some compiling, I could try to investigate myself if you tell me what to look for. |
|
|
| msg229734 - (view) |
Author: Michael Foord (michael.foord) * |
Date: 2014-10-20 17:22 |
| As _testFunc is a string and shouldn't be, I'd be very interested to know *what* the string is. That may give us a clue as to where it has come from. (So a try...except...raise that also prints that value would be a good first step.) |
|
|
| msg229735 - (view) |
Author: Antoine Pitrou (pitrou) * |
Date: 2014-10-20 17:25 |
| testFunc contains "runTest" (!). |
|
|
| msg229737 - (view) |
Author: Antoine Pitrou (pitrou) * |
Date: 2014-10-20 17:33 |
| Ok, apparently it's because I have "from unittest import *" somewhere. |
|
|
| msg230367 - (view) |
Author: Ezio Melotti (ezio.melotti) * |
Date: 2014-10-31 18:35 |
| Does removing "from unittest import *" from somewhere fix the issue? Is this a bug in your code, or did that import reveal a bug in unittest? |
|
|
| msg230369 - (view) |
Author: Antoine Pitrou (pitrou) * |
Date: 2014-10-31 18:37 |
| > Does removing "from unittest import *" from somewhere fix the issue? Yes. > Is this a bug in your code, or did that import reveal a bug in unittest? Your choice :-) |
|
|
| msg230370 - (view) |
Author: Antoine Pitrou (pitrou) * |
Date: 2014-10-31 18:38 |
| btw, in case that's not clear from the traceback, discover was mistaking FunctionTestCase as one of my test classes (while it was just there because of the "import *"). |
|
|
| msg230372 - (view) |
Author: Michael Foord (michael.foord) * |
Date: 2014-10-31 18:40 |
| Ah. Test discovery is discovering FunctionTestCase and attempting to instantiate it as a test. And failing. Maybe discovery should special case that class and not treat it as a normal TestCase. |
|
|
| msg230373 - (view) |
Author: Antoine Pitrou (pitrou) * |
Date: 2014-10-31 18:41 |
| Or perhaps everything that has as a __module__ something which has the attribute __unittest = True? (the attribute is there for a reason, right?) |
|
|
| msg230374 - (view) |
Author: Ethan Furman (ethan.furman) * |
Date: 2014-10-31 18:43 |
| Michael Foord opined: --------------------- > Maybe discovery should special case that class and not treat it as a normal TestCase. Not a bad idea. On the other hand, I don't believe unittest is advertised as supporting 'from ... import *', which *is* usually advised to be a bad idea. |
|
|
| msg230629 - (view) |
Author: Robert Collins (rbcollins) * |
Date: 2014-11-04 15:07 |
| This was reported as https://code.google.com/p/unittest-ext/issues/detail?id=71 a while back. I think blacklisting FunctionTestCase in TestLoader is entirely reasonable. |
|
|
| msg230672 - (view) |
Author: Michael Foord (michael.foord) * |
Date: 2014-11-05 09:49 |
| I agree. |
|
|
| msg233275 - (view) |
Author: Martin Panter (martin.panter) * |
Date: 2015-01-01 06:44 |
| Assuming that FunctionTestCase inherits from TestCase, a fix for Issue 14534 would be useful here. That bug is about avoiding TestCase subclasses being automatically run, which is useful for abstract base test classes. |
|
|
| msg247488 - (view) |
Author: Evan Hubinger (Evan Hubinger) * |
Date: 2015-07-27 21:38 |
| I wrote a patch to blacklist FunctionTestCase in TestLoader, and a test to make sure FunctionTestCase doesn't show up in the TestSuite after loading a module that includes it. The test runs successfully. This is my first patch, so feedback would be appreciated if I did anything wrong. |
|
|
| msg248923 - (view) |
Author: Robert Collins (rbcollins) * |
Date: 2015-08-20 23:30 |
| Thanks for this. I think that a better approach would be the other linked bug - we can kill many birds with one stone. |
|
|