Test-Driven Dev. (Kent Beck) Python Chapter Question

[yaipa h.]

Steven, Peter, John,

Thanks, yes now I see run() looses it's argument in ch21 and
doesn't get it back until page 3 of chapter 23.

I believe that I have found one other error in ch19, so I think that 
I will go a head and finish out xUnit fully and collect all the bits and
pieces into a single errata once I am done.  I'll make sure to cross post 
as suggested.

Thanks for all the help, there for a while I thought I had really 
slipped off the deep end. One does not expect such things when studying 
xUnit methods.

Even with a couple of gotchas, I still believe that the book is of great 
value to anyone trying to understand Unit Testing.

   --Alan



"John Roth" <johnroth at ameritech.net> wrote in message news:<vfmilbbkm6lm31 at news.supernews.com>...
> "Peter Hansen" <peter at engcorp.com> wrote in message
> news:3EFAF786.76B66629 at engcorp.com...
> > "yaipa h." wrote:
> > >
> > > In Chapter 20. Cleaning Up After
> > >
> > > When adding "tearDown()" to "TestCase" in xUnit, the TestCase method
>  run()
> > > suddenly takes on a new argument named "result."  In the next line
>  result
> > > is used as "result.testStarted()."  Oddly, when TestCase.run() is
>  called by
> > > "TestCaseTest" it is called without an argument, so of course Python
>  complains.
> > > If I drop "result" from the argument list and strike the line
> > > "result.testStarted()" everything works fine. I've looked and
> > > there seems to be no code download page or errata available.
> > >
> > > Anyone had similar problems with this chapter or am I reading over
> > > something here?
> >
> > I think you're right.  I looked ahead at page 114 and found what I
> > think is the first place where run() actually takes a TestResult
> > object, in a later chapter.
> >
> > It looks like this was an early mistake, as it appears even in the
>  first
> > draft of the book which had this chapter, from March 9 last year.
> > (See http://groups.yahoo.com/group/testdrivendevelopment/files/ for
> ref.)
> 
> I agree, it looks like a misprint. There's nothing in the narrative in
> Chapter
> 20 to justify putting in the collecting parameter, while there's a
> discussion in
> Chapter 23, including all the changes to the various calls that resulted
> from
> adding the parameter.
> 
> > Yaipa, if you submit this errata report on the testdrivendevelopment
> > group on Yahoo Groups it would probably be appreciated.
> >
> > -Peter
> 
> John Roth