I agree with Carl's comment on the PR:
"I don't think it would complicate the API too much to have a count=1
kwarg, and if count > 1 expect received_kwargs to be a list of lists
instead of just a list. This keeps the API identical to what it is
currently for the common case, but makes it possib
On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 1:14 AM, Aymeric Augustin <
aymeric.augus...@polytechnique.org> wrote:
> Regarding arguments, since signal receivers must accept **kwargs (that’s a
> document requirement), I think it’s acceptable for assertSignalSent to
> ignore unexpected arguments.
>
It's often the case
Hello,
On 3 Jan 2017, at 09:16, James Bennett wrote:
> Personally I'm against trying to do this in assertSignalSent, and would argue
> for a separate assertSignalSentMultiple if that use case is deemed important
> enough; coming up with a unified API that cleanly handles both the case of a
>
At DUTH this year I opened a ticket to add test-case assertions checking
whether (or not) a signal was sent:
https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/27447
And corresponding PR:
https://github.com/django/django/pull/7508
The PR has gotten bogged down in API design discussion, so I'd like to hash
t
