Hello Spir!
On Thursday 23 April 2009, spir wrote:
> I would like to refactor tests of an application in a consistent
> form. I have a ton of tests for each module, but they are all ad
> hoc things. doctest looks great. The issue is it seems based on
> command line-like testing:
I have researched
"spir" wrote
My app is about parsing, which input and output usually both are big
and complicated *strings*. So that I find the command line model
really unappropriate for expressing test cases and their expected
results.
Any hint/pointer/comment welcome,
What about using command line red
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 8:55 AM, spir wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I would like to refactor tests of an application in a consistent form. I have
> a ton of tests for each module, but they are all ad hoc things.
> My app is about parsing, which input and output usually both are big and
> complicated *str
Hello,
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 10:55 PM, spir wrote:
>
> My app is about parsing, which input and output usually both are big and
> complicated *strings*. So that I find the command line model really
> unappropriate for expressing test cases and their expected results.
>
Interesting - haven't r
Hello,
I would like to refactor tests of an application in a consistent form. I have a
ton of tests for each module, but they are all ad hoc things.
doctest looks great. The issue is it seems based on command line-like testing:
"""
This is the "example" module.
The example module supplies one f
