replacing __dict__ with an OrderedDict
Steven D'Aprano
steve+comp.lang.python at pearwood.info
Fri Jan 6 19:45:31 EST 2012
On Sat, 07 Jan 2012 04:01:44 +1100, Lie Ryan wrote:
> On 01/07/2012 12:36 AM, Ulrich Eckhardt wrote:
>> True, perhaps, but doing it this way would be more fun and easier
>> reusable in other cases where the default order is not desirable. I can
>> also go and name the test functions test_000 to test_009 to get results
>> quickly, if that was the only goal.
>
> Fun and easier, perhaps. Except that it solves the wrong problem.
Fun and easier, and a terrible thing to do. Contrast:
"test_binsearch_tuple is failing. What does that mean?"
"Oh, that tests that binsearch works on a tuple. You need to look at the
BinSearch.search_tuple method and see what it's doing."
with
"test_047 is failing. What does that mean?"
"How the hell should I know?"
Debugging is hard enough without obfuscating the test names. You wouldn't
write a function called "func_009", why write one called "test_009"?
--
Steven
More information about the Python-list
mailing list