Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #56701
| Date | 2013-10-11 10:51 -0700 |
|---|---|
| From | Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> |
| Subject | Re: Skipping decorators in unit tests |
| References | <525768a5$0$29984$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <20131011031319.GA30742@cskk.homeip.net> |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.python |
| Message-ID | <mailman.1012.1381517509.18130.python-list@python.org> (permalink) |
On 10/10/2013 08:13 PM, Cameron Simpson wrote: > On 11Oct2013 02:55, Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> wrote: >> On Fri, 11 Oct 2013 09:12:38 +1100, Cameron Simpson wrote: >>> Speaking for myself, I would be include to recast this code: >>> >>> @absolutize >>> def addition(a, b): >>> return a + b >>> >>> into: >>> >>> def _addition(a, b): >>> return a + b >>> addition = absolutize(_addition) >>> >>> Then you can unit test both _addition() and addition(). >> >> *shudders* >> Ew ew ew ew. > > Care to provide some technical discourse here? Aside from losing the neat > and evocative @decorator syntax, the above is simple and overt. And completely dismisses the whole point of adding @decorator to the language: easy to use, easy to see == folks will actually use it. >> I would much rather do something like this: >> >> def undecorate(f): >> """Return the undecorated inner function from function f.""" >> return f.func_closure[0].cell_contents > > Whereas this feels like black magic. Is this portable to any decorated > function? If so, I'd have hoped it was in the stdlib. If not: black magic. Probably black magic. But you can go with the decorator.wrapped route; after all, you're testing your own stuff so you should have control of your own decorators (okay, you may have to adapt a few others ;) . -- ~Ethan~
Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Skipping decorators in unit tests Gilles Lenfant <gilles.lenfant@gmail.com> - 2013-10-10 07:00 -0700
Re: Skipping decorators in unit tests Cameron Simpson <cs@zip.com.au> - 2013-10-11 09:12 +1100
Re: Skipping decorators in unit tests Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-10-11 02:55 +0000
Re: Skipping decorators in unit tests Cameron Simpson <cs@zip.com.au> - 2013-10-11 14:13 +1100
Re: Skipping decorators in unit tests Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-10-11 04:36 +0000
Re: Skipping decorators in unit tests Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2013-10-11 04:23 -0400
Re: Skipping decorators in unit tests Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2013-10-11 14:42 +1100
Re: Skipping decorators in unit tests Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2013-10-11 04:17 -0400
Re: Skipping decorators in unit tests Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2013-10-11 04:25 -0400
Re: Skipping decorators in unit tests Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2013-10-11 04:32 -0400
Re: Skipping decorators in unit tests Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2013-10-11 10:51 -0700
Re: Skipping decorators in unit tests Ned Batchelder <ned@nedbatchelder.com> - 2013-10-10 19:44 -0400
Re: Skipping decorators in unit tests Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2013-10-10 21:12 -0400
Re: Skipping decorators in unit tests Gilles Lenfant <gilles.lenfant@gmail.com> - 2013-10-11 02:37 -0700
Re: Skipping decorators in unit tests Cameron Simpson <cs@zip.com.au> - 2013-10-12 08:38 +1100
csiph-web