ANN: pry unit testing framework
tjreedy at udel.edu
Sat Apr 5 18:26:51 CEST 2008
"Steve Holden" <steve at holdenweb.com> wrote in message
news:ft84g9$ola$1 at ger.gmane.org...
| Aldo Cortesi wrote:
| > Thus spake Kay Schluehr (kay.schluehr at gmx.net):
**tweet** <Time out>
| >> Aldo, when you confuse inheritance ( using an OO framework properly )
| >> with monkey patching no one can draw much different conclusions than I
| >> did.
| > I guess you do always run the risk of being pelted with something from
| > the peanut gallery when you release something in public -
Yes, Guido gets attacked too.
| > maybe I'll think twice about doing so next time.
As did I. But I hope you continue to share.
| > The only "confused" person here is you - I still say that it is NOT
| > possible to provide the functionality Pry does by extending unittest in
| > any sane way. Now, if you don't agree with this, please prove me wrong
| > through reasoned argument or shut up. Do NOT, however, accuse me of not
| > knowing what inheritance or monkeypatching is unless you want to look
| > stupid and make my killfile.
| >> But raving against unittest.py and anti-hyping it for mostly trivial
| >> reasons and with shallow reasoning has become a fashion.
Let's see.. Aldo shares his project. Someone asks why he did what he did.
He explains. And you call this raving. To me, that is unfair and a
mischaracterization of his intent and action.
|>> Now we see
| >> alternatives that do little more than what can be achieved by adding
| >> two abstract methods to the TestSuite base class and overwrite a few
| >> methods of the TestLoader base class ( maybe I'm wrong about it but I
| >> guess the discussion has become too heated to clarify this point using
| >> technical arguments ).
The real proof would be code that does what you claim.
| >> I just felt it was a good opportunity to debunk this unittest.py anti-
| >> hype. I'm sorry it has gone too personal.
I gather that you were irritated at 'raving unittest.py anti-hype' before
Aldo wrote a word here. Perhaps 'debunking' would go better in a separate
thread that was not aimed at anyone in particular.
| > You can choose to use Pry or not, as you please. I would, however, ask
| > that you stop whining incessantly about how it's not compatible with
| > YOUR favourite framework, despite the fact that compatibility would
| > gain YOU very little and ME nothing at all. As I said in my response to
| > Michele, you lose the benefits of compatibility as soon as your tests
| > use any of the features an extension might add. To me, this means the
| > burden is not worth it. Since I designed and wrote Pry, I get to make
| > that choice, not you, and the type of feeble, offensive "argument"
| > you've provided is unlikely to change my mind.
| Unpleasantly personal replies of this type are unwelcome here. Please
| restrict your arguments to technical ones or refrain from posting.
Steve, Kay is the one who started and repeated 'unpleasantly personal
replies'. You should better have addressed her.
| Kay at least has a long history as a contributor in this group, so
| people know how to interpret her remarks and know that her contributions
| are made on the basis of a deep understanding of Python. She is far from
| belonging to the "peanut gallery", and to suggest otherwise betrays
| either ignorance, arrogance, or both.
| As a newcomer, however, your responses make you seem to be complaining
| that the world isn't grateful for your contributions, yet you don't seem
| to even consider the possibility that might be happening because you
| aren't explaining them well enough. To truculently suggest that reasoned
| responses make you less likely to contribute to open source in future
| suggests that you weren't ready to start in the first place.
So you, as an old-timer, excuse the old-timer for starting a spat and scold
the newcomer for responding. To me, that smells.
**Tweet** <Time in>
Terry Jan Reedy
Another old-timer, with a long history of contributions also.
More information about the Python-list