I just realized I've been replying personally to these replies instead
of the whole list (damn I hate that!). So resending a bunch of
messages that went to individuals. [Mark]
On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 3:12 PM, Nick Coghlan
On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 7:57 AM, Mark Janssen
wrote: Anyway... of course patches welcome, yes... ;^)
Not really. doctest is for *testing code example in docs*.
I understand. This is exactly what I was wanting to use it for. As Tim says "literate testing" or "executable documentation". The suggestions I made are for enhancing those two. Personally, I don't find unittest very suitable for test-driven *development*, although it *is* obviously well-suited for writing assurance tests otherwise. The key difference, to me, is in that doctest promotes tests being written in order to have the *additional functionality* of documentation. That makes it fun since your getting "twice the value for the cost of one", and that alone is the major item which drives test-driven development (IMHO) within the spirit of python, otherwise unittest is rather bulky to write in and of itself. Does anyone really use unittest outside the context of shop policy? mark