Author pitrou
Recipients asvetlov, benjamin.peterson, charettes, ezio.melotti, fabioz, gvanrossum, matthewlmcclure, matthewlmcclure-gmail, meador.inge, michael.foord, pitrou, python-dev, r.david.murray, rhettinger, terry.reedy, tim.peters, tomwardill
Date 2013-09-19.13:06:50
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <384150135.4076465.1379596004302.JavaMail.root@zimbra10-e2.priv.proxad.net>
In-reply-to <1379591915.71.0.336158598516.issue11798@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
Content
> That would only be a shallow copy, so I'm not sure it's worth the
> effort. The test has the opportunity in the setUp to ensure that
> initial state is correct - so I would leave that per test.

I don't understand your objection. The concern is to get rid of old
state after test execution.

> Obviously
> sharing state between tests is prima facie bad, but any framework
> reusing test suites is doing that already.

What do you mean?
History
Date User Action Args
2013-09-19 13:06:50pitrousetrecipients: + pitrou, gvanrossum, tim.peters, rhettinger, terry.reedy, fabioz, benjamin.peterson, ezio.melotti, r.david.murray, michael.foord, matthewlmcclure, asvetlov, meador.inge, python-dev, tomwardill, matthewlmcclure-gmail, charettes
2013-09-19 13:06:50pitroulinkissue11798 messages
2013-09-19 13:06:50pitroucreate