Re: [Pyunit-interest] comments on PyUnit

[Jeremy H. <je...@di...>]

[Apoliges if these comments come through twice in slightly different
form.  I seem to be having mail delivery problems.]

>>>>> "GvR" == Guido van Rossum <gu...@di...> writes:

  >> Yes.  I propose that the Python Library Reference only document
  >> one name for each method.  *Which* name should be decided here.
  >> This issue exists for the following pairs of names:
  >>
  >> failUnless / assert_

  GvR> failUnless

  >> assertEqual / assertEquals

  GvR> failUnlessEqual

  >> assertNotEqual / assertNotEquals

  GvR> failIfEqual

  GvR> Also, assertRaises should be changed to failUnessRaises, etc.

I strongly dislike the new names.  They are too long and express the
intended behavior in negative form.

assertRaises: "This code is correct if it raises an error."
failUnlessRaises: "This code is not correct unless it raises an error."

The former is a more natural way to express the meaning.  I would
suggest finding a different word for assert instead of finding ways to
turn all the assert calls into a negative form.

One possibility is verify.  Another is check, although that word
already has a meaning for unit testing.

Jeremy