Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #89818
| From | Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> |
|---|---|
| Subject | Re: Is this a good way to implement testing |
| Date | 2015-05-02 20:06 -0400 |
| References | <878ud6mx4y.fsf@Equus.decebal.nl> |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.python |
| Message-ID | <mailman.38.1430611594.12865.python-list@python.org> (permalink) |
On 5/2/2015 6:29 PM, Cecil Westerhof wrote:
> At the moment I define the test functionality in the following way:
Any automated testing is better than none. For idlelib, I use unittest.
For an individual project with specialized needs, I use a custom test
framework tuned to those needs.
> else:
> action = options[0][0]
> if action == '--all':
> do_all = True
> elif action == '--factorial':
> do_factorial = True
> elif action == '--fibonacci':
> do_fibonacci = True
> elif action == '--happy':
> do_happy = True
> elif action == '--lucky':
> do_lucky = True
> else:
> print >> sys.stderr, progname + ': Unhandled parameter ' + action
> sys.exit(1)
There is usually a way to factor out the duplication of repetitive code
like this. Often, a dict is somehow involved. I believe the following
is equivalent to the above.
else:
action = options[0][0]
try:
globals()['do_'+action[2:]] = True
except KeyError:
print >> sys.stderr, progname + ': Unhandled parameter ' + action
sys.exit(1)
--
Terry Jan Reedy
Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Is this a good way to implement testing Cecil Westerhof <Cecil@decebal.nl> - 2015-05-03 00:29 +0200
Re: Is this a good way to implement testing Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-05-03 00:17 +0100
Re: Is this a good way to implement testing Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2015-05-02 20:06 -0400
Re: Is this a good way to implement testing Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-05-02 20:58 -0700
Re: Is this a good way to implement testing Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2015-05-03 14:49 +1000
Re: Is this a good way to implement testing Cecil Westerhof <Cecil@decebal.nl> - 2015-05-03 09:36 +0200
Re: Is this a good way to implement testing Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-05-03 09:38 +0100
Re: Is this a good way to implement testing Peter Otten <__peter__@web.de> - 2015-05-03 10:45 +0200
Re: Is this a good way to implement testing Cecil Westerhof <Cecil@decebal.nl> - 2015-05-03 11:49 +0200
Re: Is this a good way to implement testing Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-05-03 11:21 +0100
Re: Is this a good way to implement testing Cecil Westerhof <Cecil@decebal.nl> - 2015-05-03 12:50 +0200
Re: Is this a good way to implement testing Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2015-05-03 18:52 +1000
Re: Is this a good way to implement testing Peter Otten <__peter__@web.de> - 2015-05-03 11:22 +0200
csiph-web