Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #89840
| From | Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> |
|---|---|
| Subject | Re: Is this a good way to implement testing |
| Date | 2015-05-03 18:52 +1000 |
| References | <878ud6mx4y.fsf@Equus.decebal.nl> <87383em7sn.fsf@Equus.decebal.nl> <mi4n7a$jb3$1@ger.gmane.org> |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.python |
| Message-ID | <mailman.55.1430643305.12865.python-list@python.org> (permalink) |
Peter Otten <__peter__@web.de> writes: > Be aware that there is also doctest which scans docstrings for text > resembling interactive Python sessions. Doctests are both tests and > usage examples, so I think it's good to put a few of these into the > module. Yes, it's definitely a good idea to put some examples into the docstrings as doctests. Be aware, though, that this is *not* a substitute for unit tests; doctest is for testing your documentation, not testing your code. You should not aim for extensive coverage in doctests. Heavy use of doctests makes for bad tests *and* bad documentation. Instead, write only those examples that the reader will find helpful to understand normal usage; and use the ‘doctest’ module to test that your documentation is still accurate. Put all your other broad-coverage tests elsewhere (unit tests, behaviour tests, etc.) and leave the docstrings readable. -- \ “Generally speaking, the errors in religion are dangerous; | `\ those in philosophy only ridiculous.” —David Hume, _A Treatise | _o__) of Human Nature_, 1739 | 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