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

Groups > comp.lang.python > #19883 > unrolled thread

Python and TAP

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

Contents

  Python and TAP Matej Cepl <mcepl@redhat.com> - 2012-02-06 01:58 +0100
    Re: Python and TAP Frank Becker <fb@alien8.de> - 2012-02-06 13:24 +0100
    Re: Python and TAP Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2012-02-06 15:51 -0500
      Re: Python and TAP Matej Cepl <mcepl@redhat.com> - 2012-02-06 23:03 +0100
        Re: Python and TAP alex23 <wuwei23@gmail.com> - 2012-02-06 19:21 -0800
    Re: Python and TAP alex23 <wuwei23@gmail.com> - 2012-02-06 19:24 -0800
      Re: Python and TAP Matej Cepl <mcepl@redhat.com> - 2012-02-07 09:21 +0100

#19883 — Python and TAP

I have just finished listening to the FLOSS Weekly podcast #200 
(http://twit.tv/show/floss-weekly/200) on autotest, where I've learned 
about the existence of TAP (http://testanything.org/). A standardization 
of testing seems to be so obviously The Right Thing™, that it is strange 
that I don't see much related movement in the Python world (I know only 
about http://git.codesimply.com/?p=PyTAP.git;a=summary or 
git://git.codesimply.com/PyTAP.git, which seems to be very very simple 
and only producer).

What am I missing? Why nobody seems to care about joining TAP standard?

Best,

Matěj

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#19901

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 06.02.12 01:58, Matej Cepl wrote:

Hi,

> I have just finished listening to the FLOSS Weekly podcast #200
> (http://twit.tv/show/floss-weekly/200) on autotest, where I've learned
> about the existence of TAP (http://testanything.org/). A standardization
> of testing seems to be so obviously The Right Thing™, that it is strange
> that I don't see much related movement in the Python world (I know only
> about http://git.codesimply.com/?p=PyTAP.git;a=summary or
> git://git.codesimply.com/PyTAP.git, which seems to be very very simple
> and only producer).
> 
> What am I missing? Why nobody seems to care about joining TAP standard?
Not sure. Probably it comes down to what you need depending on your tool
chain. But there are alternatives. Most prominent to my knowledge is
subunit [0]. Here is a comparison between the two [1].

One warning when you jump on the TAP train: Using the Python YAML
module PyYAML you will have to find out that TAP uses a YAML subset
called YAMLish [3]. It's not the same and pretty much defined by the
Perl implementation.

[0] https://launchpad.net/subunit
[1]
http://www.kinoshita.eti.br/2011/06/04/a-comparison-of-tap-test-anything-protocol-and-subunit/
[2] http://pyyaml.org/
[3] http://testanything.org/wiki/index.php/YAMLish

Bye,

	Frank


-- 
Frank Becker <fb@alien8.de> (jabber|mail) | http://twitter.com/41i3n8
GnuPG: 0xADC29ECD | F01B 5E9C 1D09 981B 5B40 50D3 C80F 7459 ADC2 9ECD

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

#19908

On 2/6/2012 7:24 AM, Frank Becker wrote:
> On 06.02.12 01:58, Matej Cepl wrote:

>> I have just finished listening to the FLOSS Weekly podcast #200
>> (http://twit.tv/show/floss-weekly/200) on autotest, where I've learned
>> about the existence of TAP (http://testanything.org/). A standardization
>> of testing seems to be so obviously The Right Thing™, that it is strange
>> that I don't see much related movement in the Python world (I know only

TAP is not about 'standardization of testing' but standardized 
communication of test results between test modules and test harness. 
Python's two stdlib test packages include both test-writing methods and 
a test harness. They are compatible in the sense that doctests can be 
run within the unittest framework.

>> about http://git.codesimply.com/?p=PyTAP.git;a=summary or
>> git://git.codesimply.com/PyTAP.git, which seems to be very very simple
>> and only producer).

I presume PyTAP does something like converting (or rather, wrapping) 
output from unittests to (or rather, within) the TAP format, which 
includes wrapping in YAMLish. Or it provides alternate versions of the 
numerous AssertXxx functions in unittest. This is useful for someone 
running Python tests within a TAP harness, but not otherwise.

>> What am I missing? Why nobody seems to care about joining TAP standard?

The 'TAP standard' is what the Perl TAP module does. There is a 
pre-draft for an IETF standard. You could ask why Perl people don't care 
about joining the unittest 'standard'.

-- 
Terry Jan Reedy

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

#19909

On 6.2.2012 21:51, Terry Reedy wrote:
> The 'TAP standard' is what the Perl TAP module does. There is a
> pre-draft for an IETF standard. You could ask why Perl people don't care
> about joining the unittest 'standard'.

I don't think it is fair: 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Test_Anything_Protocol#External_links (or 
http://testanything.org/wiki/index.php/TAP_Producers and 
http://testanything.org/wiki/index.php/TAP_Consumers) shows a lot of 
producers and consumers in various programming languages.

Matěj

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

#19945

On Feb 7, 8:03 am, Matej Cepl <mc...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 6.2.2012 21:51, Terry Reedy wrote:
> > The 'TAP standard' is what the Perl TAP module does. There is a
> > pre-draft for an IETF standard. You could ask why Perl people don't care
> > about joining the unittest 'standard'.
>
> I don't think it is fair:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Test_Anything_Protocol#External_links(orhttp://testanything.org/wiki/index.php/TAP_Producersandhttp://testanything.org/wiki/index.php/TAP_Consumers) shows a lot of
> producers and consumers in various programming languages.

That doesn't really disprove Terry's point. A lot of languages support
Perl's regular expression syntax too:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regular_expression#Perl-derived_regular_expressions

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

#19946

On Feb 6, 10:58 am, Matej Cepl <mc...@redhat.com> wrote:
> I have just finished listening to the FLOSS Weekly podcast #200
> (http://twit.tv/show/floss-weekly/200) on autotest, where I've learned
> about the existence of TAP (http://testanything.org/).

[...]

> What am I missing?

Experience?

Are you seriously advocating something for which you've done nothing
more than watch a podcast?

> Why nobody seems to care about joining TAP standard?

You just discovered it, why do you assume that everyone else is
familiar with it? Use it, document your successes and failures, and
then if it _has value to you_ come back and tell us about your
experiences.

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

#19950

On 7.2.2012 04:24, alex23 wrote:
> Experience?
>
> Are you seriously advocating something for which you've done nothing
> more than watch a podcast?

No, I am not. If you reread my original post, you may find that I was 
asking exactly for experience and explanation why something which seems 
to me obvious is not done. I guess there must be some hook somewhere, 
right? Which is what I was asking for.

One hook I've got (YAMLish is really ... well, let's keep this group G 
rated), others may yet to follow.

Matěj

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

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

csiph-web