Sept. 24, 2010
1:15 a.m.
On 9/23/2010 2:52 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 14:39:01 -0400 Terry Reedy<tjreedy@udel.edu> wrote:
If I were writing a class intended to implement an particular ABC, I would be happy to have an automated check function that might catch errors. 100% testing is hard to achieve.
How would an automatic check function solve anything, if you don't test that the class does what is expected?
If all tests are written with calls by position, as is my habit and general preference, they will not catch argument name mismatches that would trip up someone who prefers call by keyword or any introspection-by-name process. -- Terry Jan Reedy