Message274104
Thanks for the review, Michael.
About the use case: I use it for a process with loads code and inspect it's classes and methods. When I run this process, not always I have all the dependencies of the inspected code, so I found myself mocking all those packages before running the inspection code. This was very inconvenience, and broke any time someone added a new dependency to the code which is not in the standard library.
About the name: I agree.
About the keyword for the mock constructor: no problems.
Should I fix the code and submit an updated patch?
Do you think this function has a place in the standard mock module? |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2016-09-01 09:02:07 | Eyal Posener | set | recipients:
+ Eyal Posener, michael.foord |
2016-09-01 09:02:07 | Eyal Posener | set | messageid: <1472720527.57.0.916923299323.issue27376@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2016-09-01 09:02:07 | Eyal Posener | link | issue27376 messages |
2016-09-01 09:02:07 | Eyal Posener | create | |
|