[Python-Dev] Proposed unittest changes

[C. Titus Brown]

On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 09:37:30PM -0700, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
-> From: "Michael Foord" <fuzzyman at voidspace.org.uk>
-> >Maybe Python needs a good mocking module in the standard library. There 
-> >are plenty, but we use a particularly nice one at Resolver Systems [1]. :-)
-> 
-> -1
-> 
-> This comes up occassionally and gets shot down.
-> http://bugs.python.org/issue708125
-> 
-> Mock objects mean different things to different people.
-> Some expect more simulated behavior and others want less.
-> It's rare to find agreement about general purpose mock objects and 
-> frameworks.
-> Mock libraries create their own complexities and burdens on a programmer's 
-> memory.
-> It's often easier to create a small special case mock object
-> than to remember how to configure a general purpose one.
-> And, afaict, there is no fan club for some particular python mock
-> object library -- it seems to only come up in general discussions
-> about possibilities for growing the unittest module, and almost
-> never comes up in the context of solving a real problem that
-> hasn't already be addressed in some other way.

Also see:

http://lists.idyll.org/pipermail/testing-in-python/2007-November/000406.html

& associated thread, for those interested in the variety of mock
libraries...

cheers,
--titus
-- 
C. Titus Brown, ctb at msu.edu