[issue27504] Missing assertion methods in unittest documentation
New submission from Mitchell Model: In looking at the source for unittest.TestCase I was very surprised to see quite a few assertion methods that are not included in the module documentation. Every available assertion method should be included in the library documentation. Users should not have to look at the source to see what's available — in fact, why would it even occur to the typical user to do that? Also, I think the phrase "provides several assert methods to check for and report failures" is an understatement — it provides MANY assert methods. I think "assertion method" is a better term than "assert method". ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation messages: 270278 nosy: MLModel, docs@python priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: Missing assertion methods in unittest documentation type: enhancement versions: Python 2.7, Python 3.2, Python 3.3, Python 3.4, Python 3.5 _______________________________________ Python tracker <report@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue27504> _______________________________________
Changes by Ned Deily <nad@python.org>: ---------- nosy: +ezio.melotti, michael.foord, rbcollins versions: +Python 3.6 -Python 3.2, Python 3.3, Python 3.4 _______________________________________ Python tracker <report@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue27504> _______________________________________
R. David Murray added the comment: If you are looking at the source, you can look at the source. If you are looking at the documentation, we believe they are all documented. If you use pydoc/help, they are all documented. I can't find the phrase you cite, but 'assert methods' is correct: all of the method names start with the word 'assert'. If there are specific methods you think are *not* in the library reference that you think should be, please give examples. I suspect they will turn out to be internal helper functions. ---------- nosy: +r.david.murray _______________________________________ Python tracker <report@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue27504> _______________________________________
Mitchell Model added the comment: My strong apology. I missed a section of the documentation. It didn't seem possible that they weren't there, but I made a mistake when I checked for them. Sorry.
On Jul 12, 2016, at 9:15 PM, R. David Murray <report@bugs.python.org> wrote:
R. David Murray added the comment:
If you are looking at the source, you can look at the source. If you are looking at the documentation, we believe they are all documented. If you use pydoc/help, they are all documented.
I can't find the phrase you cite, but 'assert methods' is correct: all of the method names start with the word 'assert'.
If there are specific methods you think are *not* in the library reference that you think should be, please give examples. I suspect they will turn out to be internal helper functions.
---------- nosy: +r.david.murray
_______________________________________ Python tracker <report@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue27504> _______________________________________
---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <report@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue27504> _______________________________________
Changes by Berker Peksag <berker.peksag@gmail.com>: ---------- resolution: -> not a bug stage: -> resolved status: open -> closed _______________________________________ Python tracker <report@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue27504> _______________________________________
R. David Murray added the comment: No problem. Personally I'd like to see a table of all of them at the top; however, that wasn't the decision that was made in issue 9796 when the tables were added. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <report@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue27504> _______________________________________
participants (4)
-
Berker Peksag -
Mitchell Model
-
Ned Deily
-
R. David Murray