Message247105
I'm not wild about this idea. The problem with the assert methods has *essentially* been solved now, so I'm not convinced of the need for this change (unless users really *need* to have their own mocked attributes like "assert_called_with" which I think is highly unlikely).
Part of the genius of mock was providing a flexible mock object that also encapsulated simple methods for introspecting/asserting how it has been used. Changing to require users to import/know about a whole host of separate functions doesn't feel like an improvement to me. That's aside from the whole "breaking people's code for no tangible benefit" issue.
I acknowledge that other people, Carl for example, have different opinions - but from talking to many, many mock users over the years I think that those with the philosophically purist approach are in a minority to those who appreciate the more practical approach that mock takes. |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2015-07-22 10:22:34 | michael.foord | set | recipients:
+ michael.foord, brett.cannon, rbcollins, carljm, poke, bignose, berker.peksag, kushal.das, ztane, fov, kevinbenton |
2015-07-22 10:22:34 | michael.foord | set | messageid: <1437560554.09.0.518341243125.issue24651@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2015-07-22 10:22:34 | michael.foord | link | issue24651 messages |
2015-07-22 10:22:33 | michael.foord | create | |
|