On Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 3:04 PM, Benjamin Peterson wrote:

2009/12/30 Martin (gzlist) :

...

Hi Benjamin,

Hi!

...

In rev 74094 of Python, you split the unittest module up,

+1

...

could you point me at any bug entries or discussion over this revision so I can catch up?

This was mostly a discussion on IRC between Michael Foord and myself.

... and there was a previous thread about that some time ago here in python-dev ;o)

...

   def _is_relevant_tb_level(self, tb):        return '__unittest' in tb.tb_frame.f_globals

After: http://svn.python.org/view/python/trunk/Lib/unittest/__init__.py?revision=74095&view=markup

   def _is_relevant_tb_level(self, tb):        globs = tb.tb_frame.f_globals        is_relevant =  '__name__' in globs and \            globs["__name__"].startswith("unittest")        del globs        return is_relevant

Had not seen this ... Hmmm ... -1

...

Only packages actually named "unittest" can be excluded.

What is now the prefered method of marking a module as test-internal? Overriding the leading-underscore _is_relevant_tb_level method? How can this be done cooperatively by different packages?

When I made that change, I didn't know that the __unittest "hack" was being used elsewhere outside of unittest, so I felt fine replacing it with another. While I still consider it an implementation detail, I would be ok with exposing an "official" API for this. Perhaps __unittest_ignore_traceback?

Hmmm ... One of the issues I didn't notice ... IMO +1 for leaving it as it was before (i.e. __unittest) because : - the double underscore should mean (CMIIW) that it's an implementation detail - not few libs use that name already ;o) +0.5 for adding `__unittest_ignore_traceback` or something shorter (e.g. `__unittest_ignore`) too ... +1 for documenting that «hack» PS: `assertRaises` context managers are great !!! BTW ;o) -- Regards, Olemis. Blog ES: http://simelo-es.blogspot.com/ Blog EN: http://simelo-en.blogspot.com/ Featured article: Assessment of unittest 2.7 API : new features and opinions - http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/simelo-en/~3/cVOgG8NIBFY/assessment-of-unitte...

Olemis Lang wrote:

PS: `assertRaises` context managers are great !!! BTW ;o)

The detailed comparison methods added for 2.7 are really nice too. It's great getting error messages that tell me what I broke rather than "you broke it!" :) Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia ---------------------------------------------------------------

On Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 10:30 AM, Martin (gzlist) wrote:

Thanks for the quick response.

On 30/12/2009, Benjamin Peterson wrote:

...

When I made that change, I didn't know that the __unittest "hack" was being used elsewhere outside of unittest, so I felt fine replacing it with another. While I still consider it an implementation detail, I would be ok with exposing an "official" API for this. Perhaps __unittest_ignore_traceback?

Well, bazaar has had the trick for a couple of years, and googling around now turns up some other projects using it or thinking about it: http://github.com/gfxmonk/mocktest/commit/b5e94f7ee06ab627cea2c9cf90d0aeb63e... http://bitbucket.org/uche/amara/changeset/eeaf69f48271/ http://twistedmatrix.com/trac/ticket/4127

Add `dutest` and probably `nose` [2]_ and ...

Reinstating the old implementation (with the same name) would mean that existing code would keep working with Python 2.7

IOW ... if it is removed all the libraries will have to change and check for the Py version and ... (probably not a big deal depending on the details of the «solution»)

but maybe a discussion could start about a new, less hacky, way of doing the same

I am strongly -1 for modifying the classes in «traditional» unittest module [2]_ (except that I am strongly +1 for the package structure WITHOUT TOUCHING anything else ...) , and the more I think about it I am more convinced ... but anyway, this not a big deal (and in the end what I think is not that relevant either ... :o). So ... pass

May not be worthwhile making life more complicated though, there aren't *that* many unittest-extending projects.

But every library extending `unittest` will do it or otherwise not-so-useful error messages will be displayed ;o) PS: Happy New Year ! BTW .. [1] [feature] nosexml should omit trace frames where `__unittest... (http://code.google.com/p/python-nosexml/issues/detail?id=4#c0) .. [2] Assessment of unittest 2.7 API : new features and opinions (http://simelo-en.blogspot.com/2009/12/assessment-of-unittest-27-api-new.html) -- Regards, Olemis. Blog ES: http://simelo-es.blogspot.com/ Blog EN: http://simelo-en.blogspot.com/ Featured article: Free new ripit 1.3.3 Download - mac software - http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/TracGViz-full/~3/KFwyUTKH0vI/