[Python-Dev] Cleaning-up the new unittest API (original) (raw)

Antoine Pitrou solipsis at pitrou.net
Sat Oct 30 20:35:22 CEST 2010

On Sat, 30 Oct 2010 14:24:10 -0400 "R. David Murray" <rdmurray at bitdance.com> wrote:

On Sat, 30 Oct 2010 18:36:45 +0200, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net> wrote: > On Sat, 30 Oct 2010 12:02:27 -0400 > "R. David Murray" <rdmurray at bitdance.com> wrote: > > > > I don't disagree with this simplification, but given that you all want > > to pare down the unittest API, I'd be interested in your opinions on > > issue 10164. Because the assertBytesEqual method takes an optional > > argument, it seems like it would need to be documented, even though > > it would in a lot of cases just be used through assertEqual. > > The optional argument doesn't look very useful. I imagine there are > plenty of special cases where you could need custom splitting of > bytestrings on a given byte, a regexp pattern, or along some fixed > chunk length, but they are special cases.

Well, I have a specific special case I need it for: comparing byte strings that are wire-format email messages. Considering how much of a pain it was to get right, I'd hate to see people have to reimplement the guts of it for each special case. Maybe a 'makechunks' argument that takes a function that returns a list?

Well, I was hoping that we don't need to make assertBytesEqual a public API ;)

Regards

Antoine.

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list