Author rhettinger
Recipients rhettinger, serhiy.storchaka
Date 2014-02-14.02:15:59
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1392344161.29.0.585961065902.issue20547@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
These should be backported.

And it probably shouldn't be done at all unless there is an actual failure with an uninformative error message.  Otherwise, you're just destabilizing the test suite and creating unnecessary code churn.

In the case of the collections tests, I used test-driven-development for parts of it and am very confident in the test as they stand.  If you start  switching the test methods, I become less confident in those tests (i.e. I haven't seen the new ones fail in the absence of the code they were meant to test).

Additionally, the "more specific tests" introduce some additional opacity that is harmful for knowing what methods and operators are specifically used internally in test method.  For end users of Python, they don't have to worry much about this, but we as developers of core types really care whether self.assertLessThan(x, y) really does x < y, or x.__lt__(y), or "not y >= x", etc.

IOW, I am of the strong opinion that your patches are not a good idea.  The "more specific tests" can be used in new tests or in tests that are failing, but going back and making blanket sweeps of the test suite isn't a good practice.

Please lookup Guido's comments on "holistic refactoring" being preferred to these kind of "sweeps".
History
Date User Action Args
2014-02-14 02:16:01rhettingersetrecipients: + rhettinger, serhiy.storchaka
2014-02-14 02:16:01rhettingersetmessageid: <1392344161.29.0.585961065902.issue20547@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2014-02-14 02:16:01rhettingerlinkissue20547 messages
2014-02-14 02:15:59rhettingercreate