Message296589
| Author |
mariocj89 |
| Recipients |
berker.peksag, ericvw, grzgrzgrz3, mariocj89, michael.foord, rbcollins, vstinner |
| Date |
2017年06月21日.22:15:41 |
| SpamBayes Score |
-1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified |
Yes |
| Message-id |
<1498083341.89.0.0142743933101.issue30541@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
Whilst I agree that using spec can be used for a similar purpose and I did not know about being able to do nested definitions via the arguments (the **{"method1.return_value": 1}, really cool!) I find the idea of allowing users to halt the mock generation really useful. It is much less disruptive and feels more natural.
Compare:
>>> inner_m = Mock(spec=["method2"], **{"method2.return_value": 1})
>>> m = Mock(spec=["method1"], **{"method1.return_value": inner_m})
with:
>>> m = mock.Mock()
>>> m.method1().method2() = 1
>>> mock.seal(m)
In brief, seal allows users to just add the method to their existing workflow where they use generic mocks. Moreover, it is extremely user friendly, many of the developers that struggle with the mocking module found seal really helpful. |
|