Message345499
| Author |
rbcollins |
| Recipients |
Gregory.Salvan, Julian, eric.araujo, martin.panter, michael.foord, ncoghlan, pakal, r.david.murray, rbcollins, serhiy.storchaka |
| Date |
2019年06月13日.11:11:19 |
| SpamBayes Score |
-1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified |
Yes |
| Message-id |
<1560424280.02.0.662536833273.issue19645@roundup.psfhosted.org> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
Right now that attribute could be set by each test separately, or even varied within a test.
TBH I'm not sure that the attribute really should be supported; perhaps thinking about breaking the API is worth doing.
But - what are we solving for here. The OP here seems interested in using the assertion like things entirely outside of a test context.
What would a nice clean API for that be? (Yes I like matchers, but put that aside - if the APIs aren't close enough, lets make sure we do a good job for each audience rather than a compromise..) |
|