[Python-ideas] SealedMock proposal for unittest.mock
mariocj89 at gmail.com
Thu Jun 1 08:43:44 EDT 2017
Having it part of the existing Mock class might be great. I really like the
idea of mock.seal(mock_object).
Let me try it out and draft some code and I'll open the issue. Thanks :)
On 1 June 2017 at 13:29, Julien Duponchelle <julien at gns3.net> wrote:
> Perhaps you can set via configure_mock. This will prevent conflict with
> existing code.
> On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 2:17 PM Victor Stinner <victor.stinner at gmail.com>
>> A stricter mock object cannot be a bad idea :-) I am not sure about your
>> proposed API: some random code may already use this attribute. Maybe it can
>> be a seal (mock) function which sets a secret attribute with a less common
>> Yeah, please open an issue on bugs.python.org ;-)
>> Le 29 mai 2017 11:33 PM, "Mario Corchero" <mariocj89 at gmail.com> a écrit :
>>> Hello Everyone!
>>> First time writing to python-ideas.
>>> Add a new mock class within the mock module
>>> SealedMock (or RestrictedMock) that allows to restrict in a dynamic and
>>> recursive way the addition of attributes to it. The new class just defines
>>> a special attribute "sealed" which once set to True the behaviour of
>>> automatically creating mocks is blocked, as well as for all its "submocks".
>>> See sealedmock
>>> <https://github.com/mariocj89/sealedmock/blob/master/README.md>. Don't
>>> focus on the implementation, it is ugly, it would be much simpler within
>>> Inspired by GMock
>>> <https://github.com/google/googletest/tree/master/googlemock> RestrictedMock,
>>> SealedMock aims to allow the developer to define a narrow interface to the
>>> mock that defines what the mocks allows to be called on.
>>> The feature of mocks returning mocks by default is extremely useful but
>>> not always desired. Quite often you rely on it only at the time you are
>>> writing the test but you want it to be disabled at the time the mock is
>>> passed into your code, that is what SealedMock aims to address.
>>> This solution also prevents user errors when mocking incorrect paths or
>>> having typos when calling attributes/methods of the mock.
>>> We have tried it internally in our company and it gives quite a nicer
>>> user experience for many use cases, specially for new users of mock as it
>>> helps out when you mock the wrong path.
>>> - Using auto_spec/spec is a possible solution but removes
>>> flexibility and is rather painful to write for each of the mocks and
>>> submocks being used.
>>> - Leaving it outside of the mock.py as it is not interesting enough.
>>> I am fine with it :) just proposing it in case you think otherwise.
>>> - Make it part of the standard Mock base class. Works for me, but
>>> I'd concerned on how can we do it in a backward compatible way. (Say
>>> someone is mocking something that has a "sealed" attribute already).
>>> Let me know what you think, happy to open a enhancement in
>>> https://bugs.python.org/ and send a PR.
>>> Python-ideas mailing list
>>> Python-ideas at python.org
>>> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
>> Python-ideas mailing list
>> Python-ideas at python.org
>> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Python-ideas