This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author diekhans
Recipients Yaroslav.Halchenko, abingham, brian.curtin, diekhans, eric.araujo, eric.snow, exarkun, ezio.melotti, fperez, michael.foord, nchauvat, ncoghlan, pere.martir, pitrou, r.david.murray, terry.reedy
Date 2012-01-17.09:00:49
SpamBayes Score 7.0849704e-09
Marked as misclassified No
Message-id <>
In-reply-to <>
Allowing loadTestsFromTestCase() to take either a testCaseClass
or a (testCaseClass, param) tuple, where the param is then past
to the __init__ function might do the trick.  One param is sufficient, since it can
be a container for any number of params. This allows more fields
to be added to the tuple for some future, unforeseen need.

An container object for class and parameters would be a bit more
structured than a tuple.

A factory function would be the most flexible, however it seems
to go against the class introspection for discovering tests.
Then again, I don't know the code very well.

R. David Murray <> writes:
> R. David Murray <> added the comment:
> Maybe we could add a recipe for doing this to the load_tests docs?
> I don't think that load_tests is going to be more readable, though, since it doesn't allow you to put the parameterization next to the class you are parameterizing (unless you do some additional hackery).
> But yes, if anything else is done a concrete API proposal is the first requirement.
> ----------
> _______________________________________
> Python tracker <>
> <>
> _______________________________________
Date User Action Args
2012-01-17 09:00:51diekhanssetrecipients: + diekhans, terry.reedy, exarkun, ncoghlan, pitrou, ezio.melotti, eric.araujo, r.david.murray, michael.foord, brian.curtin, fperez, Yaroslav.Halchenko, nchauvat, abingham, eric.snow, pere.martir
2012-01-17 09:00:50diekhanslinkissue12600 messages
2012-01-17 09:00:49diekhanscreate