Mark Janssen wrote:
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 1:22 PM, Ethan Furman wrote:
I should probably correct myself. It is suiltable, just not enjoyable. But now I know you are someone who likes all that arcana of unittest module.
I'm not sure about that -- having to exactly reproduce the output of the interpreter seems kind of arcane to me. ;)
Well, you're an interesting test case for a theory -- some people shouldn't be coding in python...
Wow. Talk about mixed emotions -- on the one hand I totally agree with you, on the other I haven't been that offended in quite some time. ;)
Python, as I see, is "the coder's language". It's meant for a programmers who want to write code for the sake of their art -- coding for him/herself firstly (and their community) and secondly for "industrial productions" -- shops that just churn out working apps without a consideration for the art.
While Python is the most enjoyable language I have ever used, I strive for mastery and beauty in all the languages I work with. One of Python's big strengths is it's simplicity, while still allowing for great power (with it's data structures, exception handling, metaclasses (okay, not so simple there ;)).
In the latter case, tests won't be for future coders in your community, but for maintaining "/la machine/" -- the simple, logical machine in your code.
I fail to see your point here with regards to doctest versus unittest. When I actually write the docs for my dbf module (simple Sphinx generated at the moment), I will have examples in it and run it through doctest. However, I will still have the unit tests as the primary test bench for it.
As an example, for the dBase III table type there are five field types. There is a test for a table with each possible combination (not permutation) of one to five of those field types (okay, so I'm slightly paranoid, too ;) -- would you really want to see that in your documentation?
This, to me, is the primary split between those of us who still have high hopes for a true Python3000 (now evolved into python4000 because of release v3) and the rest....
Overall I am quite happy with Py3k. I seriously doubt that I would be 100% satisfied with somebody else's language simply because we are not the same individual and so have different preferences. I can say I am at least 95% happy with Python, which is the best approval rating I have been able to give since Assembly.
If Python 3 is so hope-dashing, perhaps you should fork your own version?
Accurate in your case?
That I shouldn't be using Python? No, inaccurate.
That I am part of the bunch so disappointed with Py3k that I am yearning for Py4k? No, inaccurate.