Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #89828
| Path | csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!news.redatomik.org!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed3a.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail |
|---|---|
| Return-Path | <python-python-list@m.gmane.org> |
| X-Original-To | python-list@python.org |
| Delivered-To | python-list@mail.python.org |
| X-Spam-Status | OK 0.015 |
| X-Spam-Evidence | '*H*': 0.97; '*S*': 0.00; 'test,': 0.07; 'deprecated': 0.09; 'latter': 0.09; 'optparse': 0.09; 'parsing': 0.09; 'received:80.91': 0.09; 'received:80.91.229': 0.09; 'received:gmane.org': 0.09; 'received:list': 0.09; 'unittest': 0.09; 'whichever': 0.09; 'fashionable.': 0.16; 'finney': 0.16; 'received:80.91.229.3': 0.16; 'received:plane.gmane.org': 0.16; 'library': 0.18; 'unlike': 0.19; 'proposed': 0.22; 'header:User- Agent:1': 0.23; 'library,': 0.24; 'math': 0.24; 'paul': 0.24; 'header:X-Complaints-To:1': 0.27; 'testing': 0.29; "i'm": 0.30; 'writes:': 0.31; 'option': 0.32; 'quite': 0.32; 'url:python': 0.33; "can't": 0.35; 'but': 0.35; 'acceptable': 0.36; 'library.': 0.36; 'url:org': 0.36; 'should': 0.36; 'unit': 0.37; 'ben': 0.38; 'url:library': 0.38; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.38; 'that,': 0.38; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; 'received:org': 0.40; 'url:3': 0.61; 'more': 0.64; 'different': 0.65; 'skip:\xe2 10': 0.65; 'capable': 0.67; 'normal.': 0.68; '8bit%:43': 0.74; '8bit%:46': 0.78; 'subject:this': 0.83; 'received:125': 0.84; 'subject:good': 0.84; '8bit%:33': 0.91; 'migrating': 0.91 |
| X-Injected-Via-Gmane | http://gmane.org/ |
| To | python-list@python.org |
| From | Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> |
| Subject | Re: Is this a good way to implement testing |
| Date | Sun, 03 May 2015 14:49:30 +1000 |
| References | <878ud6mx4y.fsf@Equus.decebal.nl> <87k2wq2tx8.fsf@jester.gateway.sonic.net> |
| Mime-Version | 1.0 |
| Content-Type | text/plain; charset=utf-8 |
| Content-Transfer-Encoding | 8bit |
| X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host | jigong.madmonks.org |
| X-Public-Key-ID | 0xAC128405 |
| X-Public-Key-Fingerprint | 517C F14B B2F3 98B0 CB35 4855 B8B2 4C06 AC12 8405 |
| X-Public-Key-URL | http://www.benfinney.id.au/contact/bfinney-pubkey.asc |
| X-Post-From | Ben Finney <bignose+hates-spam@benfinney.id.au> |
| User-Agent | Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.4 (gnu/linux) |
| Cancel-Lock | sha1:j+w0SY6GuDN6r9CqRPzj9DXPMYM= |
| X-BeenThere | python-list@python.org |
| X-Mailman-Version | 2.1.20+ |
| Precedence | list |
| List-Id | General discussion list for the Python programming language <python-list.python.org> |
| List-Unsubscribe | <https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=unsubscribe> |
| List-Archive | <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/> |
| List-Post | <mailto:python-list@python.org> |
| List-Help | <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=help> |
| List-Subscribe | <https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=subscribe> |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.python |
| Message-ID | <mailman.45.1430628582.12865.python-list@python.org> (permalink) |
| Lines | 32 |
| NNTP-Posting-Host | 2001:888:2000:d::a6 |
| X-Trace | 1430628582 news.xs4all.nl 2891 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:42543 |
| X-Complaints-To | abuse@xs4all.nl |
| Xref | csiph.com comp.lang.python:89828 |
Show key headers only | View raw
Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> writes: > Cecil Westerhof <Cecil@decebal.nl> writes: > > > action = options[0][0] > > if action == '--all': ... > > Yecch, use an option parsing library for that, whichever one is > currently fashionable. I think optparse is deprecated now but I still > use it because I'm used to it. Yes, ‘optparse’ has been superseded by the more capable ‘argparse’ library <URL:https://docs.python.org/3/library/argparse.html>. Migrating from ‘optparse’ to ‘argparse’ is quite straightforward, since the latter was designed to be very similar. > > Is this an acceptable way of working? > > You should also use the currently fashionable unit testing library. I > use unittest because yada yada but I think it's now considered old > school. I disagree, using ‘unittest’ is still quite normal. It's also in the standard library, unlike proposed replacements. -- \ “Instead of having ‘answers’ on a math test, they should just | `\ call them ‘impressions’, and if you got a different | _o__) ‘impression’, so what, can't we all be brothers?” —Jack Handey | Ben Finney
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