Author pitrou
Recipients Arfrever, Julian, Yaroslav.Halchenko, abingham, bfroehle, borja.ruiz, brett.cannon, brian.curtin, chris.jerdonek, eric.araujo, eric.snow, exarkun, ezio.melotti, fperez, hpk, michael.foord, nchauvat, ncoghlan, pitrou, r.david.murray, santoso.wijaya, serhiy.storchaka, spiv
Date 2013-01-30.19:04:46
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1359572514.3422.0.camel@localhost.localdomain>
In-reply-to <>
> The current API doesn't seem like a good building block because it
> bundles orthogonal features (i.e. to add loop failure data to a block
> of asserts you have to use the continuance feature).  Why not expose
> *those* as the building blocks?  The API can be something like--
>     with self.addMessage(msg):
>         # Add msg to the longDescription of any assertion failure
> within.
>     with self.continueTest(msg=''):
>         # Keep running the TestCase on any assertion failure within.
> (The current subTest() is basically equivalent to continueTest() with
> a specialized message.  It could be added, too, if desired.)
> Accepting a string message is more basic and flexible than allowing
> only a **kwargs dict, which seems a bit "cute" and specialized to me.

I've already replied to all this.
Date User Action Args
2013-01-30 19:04:46pitrousetrecipients: + pitrou, brett.cannon, spiv, exarkun, ncoghlan, ezio.melotti, eric.araujo, Arfrever, r.david.murray, michael.foord, brian.curtin, hpk, fperez, chris.jerdonek, Yaroslav.Halchenko, santoso.wijaya, nchauvat, Julian, abingham, eric.snow, serhiy.storchaka, borja.ruiz, bfroehle
2013-01-30 19:04:46pitroulinkissue16997 messages
2013-01-30 19:04:46pitroucreate