[Zope-CMF] Will the real test please step forward?

Charlie Clark charlie.clark at clark-consulting.eu
Fri Jun 25 14:30:58 EDT 2010

Am 03.04.2010, 19:56 Uhr, schrieb Charlie Clark  
<charlie.clark at clark-consulting.eu>:

> Am 03.04.2010, 19:47 Uhr, schrieb Tres Seaver <tseaver at palladion.com>:
>> Sounds right.  I'm probably the guilty part here (or at least those look
>> like my style of testing ;).
> At least they're in there! Still working on mine for my new "absolut"  
> skin.

This one is for Tres,

been cribbing shamelessly from the ursa tests (thanks!) and noticed  
another duplicate:

     def test_icon_wo_getIconURL_w_icon(self):
         view = self._makeOne()
         view.context.getIconURL = lambda: 'ICON'
         view.context.icon = 'ICON2'
         self.assertEqual(view.icon, 'ICON')

     def test_icon_wo_getIconURL_w_icon(self):
         view = self._makeOne()
         view.context.icon = 'ICON'
         self.assertEqual(view.icon, 'ICON')

What are the guidelines on docstrings in unit tests? I'm finding it  
helpful to write some kind of narrative which says what parameters are  
being twiddled and what I expect as a result. Doesn't stop the contortions  
with the method names but might help otherwise.

Charlie Clark
Managing Director
Clark Consulting & Research
German Office
Helmholtzstr. 20
D- 40215
Tel: +49-211-600-3657
Mobile: +49-178-782-6226

More information about the Zope-CMF mailing list