Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.python > #25475 > unrolled thread

Re: assertraises behaviour

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: assertraises behaviour andrea crotti <andrea.crotti.0@gmail.com> - 2012-07-17 10:06 +0100
    Re: assertraises behaviour Ulrich Eckhardt <ulrich.eckhardt@dominolaser.com> - 2012-07-17 12:34 +0200
      RE: assertraises behaviour "Prasad, Ramit" <ramit.prasad@jpmorgan.com> - 2012-07-17 17:49 +0000
      Re: assertraises behaviour Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-07-17 19:03 +0100
      RE: assertraises behaviour "Prasad, Ramit" <ramit.prasad@jpmorgan.com> - 2012-07-17 21:04 +0000

#25475 — Re: assertraises behaviour

2012/7/16 Peter Otten <__peter__@web.de>:
> No, I don't see how the code you gave above can fail with an OSError.
>
> Can you give an example that produces the desired behaviour with nose? Maybe
> we can help you translate it to basic unittest.
>
> --
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list


Well this is what I meant:

import unittest

class TestWithRaises(unittest.TestCase):
    def test_first(self):
        assert False

    def test_second(self):
        print("also called")
        assert True

if __name__ == '__main__':
    unittest.main()

in this case also the second test is run even if the first fails..
But that's probably easy because we just need to catch exceptions for
every method call, so it's not exactly the same thing..

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#25485

Am 17.07.2012 11:06, schrieb andrea crotti:
> import unittest
>
> class TestWithRaises(unittest.TestCase):
>      def test_first(self):
>          assert False
>
>      def test_second(self):
>          print("also called")
>          assert True
>
> if __name__ == '__main__':
>      unittest.main()
>
> in this case also the second test is run even if the first fails..

The reason for that is that the unit testing framework catches and 
handles the error. It calls both test functions in some unspecified 
order and logs the result. Calls to two separate test functions are 
thereby separated from each other. This is intentionally so, but I think 
you can also give the unit testing framework a flag that makes it abort 
after the first error. In no way will the exception escape from the 
unittest.main() call though, it is all caught and handled inside, also 
by intention.


> But that's probably easy because we just need to catch exceptions for
> every method call, so it's not exactly the same thing..

I don't understand what you want to say here. I also don't understand 
what your problem in general is. I guess there are some expectations 
which are not satisfied, but you haven't explained those explicitly yet.

Uli

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25521

> > import unittest
> >
> > class TestWithRaises(unittest.TestCase):
> >      def test_first(self):
> >          assert False
> >
> >      def test_second(self):
> >          print("also called")
> >          assert True
> >
> > if __name__ == '__main__':
> >      unittest.main()
> >
> > in this case also the second test is run even if the first fails..
> 
> The reason for that is that the unit testing framework catches and
> handles the error. It calls both test functions in some unspecified
> order and logs the result. Calls to two separate test functions are
> thereby separated from each other. This is intentionally so, but I think
> you can also give the unit testing framework a flag that makes it abort
> after the first error. In no way will the exception escape from the
> unittest.main() call though, it is all caught and handled inside, also
> by intention.
> 
> 
> > But that's probably easy because we just need to catch exceptions for
> > every method call, so it's not exactly the same thing..
> 
> I don't understand what you want to say here. I also don't understand
> what your problem in general is. I guess there are some expectations
> which are not satisfied, but you haven't explained those explicitly yet.
>

I think Andrea wants to do the same thing but with nose and not
unittest.

Ramit

This email is confidential and subject to important disclaimers and
conditions including on offers for the purchase or sale of
securities, accuracy and completeness of information, viruses,
confidentiality, legal privilege, and legal entity disclaimers,
available at http://www.jpmorgan.com/pages/disclosures/email.  

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25527

On 17/07/2012 18:49, Prasad, Ramit wrote:
>>> import unittest
>>>
>>> class TestWithRaises(unittest.TestCase):
>>>       def test_first(self):
>>>           assert False
>>>
>>>       def test_second(self):
>>>           print("also called")
>>>           assert True
>>>
>>> if __name__ == '__main__':
>>>       unittest.main()
>>>
>>> in this case also the second test is run even if the first fails..
>>
>> The reason for that is that the unit testing framework catches and
>> handles the error. It calls both test functions in some unspecified
>> order and logs the result. Calls to two separate test functions are
>> thereby separated from each other. This is intentionally so, but I think
>> you can also give the unit testing framework a flag that makes it abort
>> after the first error. In no way will the exception escape from the
>> unittest.main() call though, it is all caught and handled inside, also
>> by intention.
>>
>>
>>> But that's probably easy because we just need to catch exceptions for
>>> every method call, so it's not exactly the same thing..
>>
>> I don't understand what you want to say here. I also don't understand
>> what your problem in general is. I guess there are some expectations
>> which are not satisfied, but you haven't explained those explicitly yet.
>>
>
> I think Andrea wants to do the same thing but with nose and not
> unittest.
>
> Ramit
>
> This email is confidential and subject to important disclaimers and
> conditions including on offers for the purchase or sale of
> securities, accuracy and completeness of information, viruses,
> confidentiality, legal privilege, and legal entity disclaimers,
> available at http://www.jpmorgan.com/pages/disclosures/email.
>

Do what?  Like Ulrich Eckhart I simply don't understand what she's 
getting at.  Perhaps it's a problem with Englsh being a second language 
issue rather than Python itself.  Thankfully I'm sure that everything 
will come out in the wash.

-- 
Cheers.

Mark Lawrence.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25540

> On 17/07/2012 18:49, Prasad, Ramit wrote:
> >>> import unittest
> >>>
> >>> class TestWithRaises(unittest.TestCase):
> >>>       def test_first(self):
> >>>           assert False
> >>>
> >>>       def test_second(self):
> >>>           print("also called")
> >>>           assert True
> >>>
> >>> if __name__ == '__main__':
> >>>       unittest.main()
> >>>
> >>> in this case also the second test is run even if the first fails..
> >>
> >> The reason for that is that the unit testing framework catches and
> >> handles the error. It calls both test functions in some unspecified
> >> order and logs the result. Calls to two separate test functions are
> >> thereby separated from each other. This is intentionally so, but I think
> >> you can also give the unit testing framework a flag that makes it abort
> >> after the first error. In no way will the exception escape from the
> >> unittest.main() call though, it is all caught and handled inside, also
> >> by intention.
> >>
> >>
> >>> But that's probably easy because we just need to catch exceptions for
> >>> every method call, so it's not exactly the same thing..
> >>
> >> I don't understand what you want to say here. I also don't understand
> >> what your problem in general is. I guess there are some expectations
> >> which are not satisfied, but you haven't explained those explicitly yet.
> >>
> >
> > I think Andrea wants to do the same thing but with nose and not
> > unittest.
> >
> > Ramit
> >
> 
> Do what?  Like Ulrich Eckhart I simply don't understand what she's
> getting at.  Perhaps it's a problem with Englsh being a second language
> issue rather than Python itself.  Thankfully I'm sure that everything
> will come out in the wash.
> 
> --
> Cheers.
> 
> Mark Lawrence.


I get the impression that nose stops running tests once any test 
fails instead of running all tests and listing all the tests and 
their pass/fail status (like unittest). Granted that is just what 
I get from the context as I read it as I have no knowledge of nose.

Ramit
This email is confidential and subject to important disclaimers and
conditions including on offers for the purchase or sale of
securities, accuracy and completeness of information, viruses,
confidentiality, legal privilege, and legal entity disclaimers,
available at http://www.jpmorgan.com/pages/disclosures/email.  

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python

csiph-web