ANN: pry unit testing framework

Matthieu Brucher matthieu.brucher at
Sun Apr 6 12:03:45 CEST 2008

2008/4/5, Aldo Cortesi <aldo at>:
> Thus spake Matthieu Brucher (matthieu.brucher at
> > How does it compare to the nose framework ?
> As far as the base unit testing functionality is concerned, I think
> they try to address similar problems. Both have assert-based testing
> with inspection and re-parsing of assert exceptions for better error
> messages. Both try to provide better fixture management. Both make
> programmatic test generation easier. Both have a command-line tool for
> running and gathering tests.
> I like nose, but I'm biased, and of course I think Pry has some
> advantages. One difference I'd point out is Pry's tree-based test
> structure, which provides a number of conveniences and features (much
> nicer test selection from the command line, for instance). Pry is also
> less than half the size of nose, and should therefore be simpler to
> extend and understand.
> At any rate, feel free to take a look at Pry and see what you think.

One last question : does it take doctests into account ?

Thanks for the last answer ;)

French PhD student
Website :
Blogs : and
LinkedIn :
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the Python-list mailing list