On Wed, 19 Mar 2014 20:32:38 +0100, Georg Brandl <g.brandl@gmx.net> wrote:

Am 19.03.2014 19:55, schrieb Antoine Pitrou:

...

On Wed, 19 Mar 2014 10:53:31 -0700 Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> wrote:

...

I just made a change to some error messages [1] (really, just one):

old behavior:

'%o' % 3.14 'float' object cannot be interpreted as an integer

new behavior:

'%o' % 3.14 %o format: an integer is required, not float

Would we normally add a test for that?

Depends if you're fearing a regression.

If he fears regressions in error messages, he shouldn't be changing them in the first place :)

In this type of situation I will often write a unit test that makes sure that the piece of information I just added to the message is really in the message ('%o', in this case), using assertRaisesRegex. I don't think it is required, but I like to do it, because it would indeed be a regression if that information stopped appearing in the message. --David

On Wed, 19 Mar 2014 20:32:38 +0100, Georg Brandl <g.brandl@gmx.net> wrote:

Am 19.03.2014 19:55, schrieb Antoine Pitrou:

...

On Wed, 19 Mar 2014 10:53:31 -0700 Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> wrote:

...

I just made a change to some error messages [1] (really, just one):

old behavior:

'%o' % 3.14 'float' object cannot be interpreted as an integer

new behavior:

'%o' % 3.14 %o format: an integer is required, not float

Would we normally add a test for that?

Depends if you're fearing a regression.

If he fears regressions in error messages, he shouldn't be changing them in the first place :)

In this type of situation I will often write a unit test that makes sure that the piece of information I just added to the message is really in the message ('%o', in this case), using assertRaisesRegex. I don't think it is required, but I like to do it, because it would indeed be a regression if that information stopped appearing in the message. --David