# unittests with different parameters

Ulrich Eckhardt ulrich.eckhardt at dominolaser.com
Mon Nov 22 12:38:10 CET 2010

```Hi!

I'm writing tests and I'm wondering how to achieve a few things most
elegantly with Python's unittest module.

Let's say I have two flags invert X and invert Y. Now, for testing these, I
would write one test for each combination. What I have in the test case is
something like this:

def test_invert_flags(self):
"""test flags to invert coordinates"""
tests = [((10, 20), INVERT_NONE, (10, 20)),
((10, 20), INVERT_X, (-10, 20)),
((10, 20), INVERT_Y, (10, -20))]
for input, flags, expected in tests:
res = do_invert(input, flags)
self.assertEqual(res, expected,
"%s caused wrong results" % (flags,))

So, what I do that I test the function 'do_invert' for different input
combinations and verify the result. The ugly thing is that this will abort
the whole test if one of the tests in the loop fails. So, my question is
how do I avoid this?

I know that I could write a common test function instead:

def _test_invert_flags(self, input, flags, expected):
res = do_invert(input, flags)
self.assertEqual(res, expected)

def test_invert_flags_non(self):
"""test not inverting coordinates"""
self._test_invert_flags((10, 20), INVERT_NONE, (10, 20))

def test_invert_flags_x(self):
"""test inverting X coordinates"""
self._test_invert_flags((10, 20), INVERT_X, (-10, 20))

def test_invert_flags_y(self):
"""test inverting Y coordinates"""
self._test_invert_flags((10, 20), INVERT_Y, (10, -20))

What I don't like here is that this is unnecessarily verbose and that it
basically repeats information. Also, I'd rather construct the error message
from the data instead of maintaining it in different places, because
manually keeping those in sync is another, errorprone burden.

Any suggestions?

Uli

--
Domino Laser GmbH
Geschäftsführer: Thorsten Föcking, Amtsgericht Hamburg HR B62 932

```