This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author CendioOssman
Recipients CendioOssman, cjw296, lisroach, mariocj89, michael.foord, xtreak
Date 2021-05-06.11:46:48
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1620301608.26.0.636636620696.issue44052@roundup.psfhosted.org>
In-reply-to
Content
I've always been cautious about running patch() manually since it was easy to miss the cleanup. But those fears might be irrelevant these days when we have addCleanup().

Still, decorators are a more robust in more complex setups since you don't have to worry about setUp() being properly called in every base class. So I still think this would be interesting.

A different function might be an option to avoid adding arguments. Just like there are a few special patch.*() already.
History
Date User Action Args
2021-05-06 11:46:48CendioOssmansetrecipients: + CendioOssman, cjw296, michael.foord, lisroach, mariocj89, xtreak
2021-05-06 11:46:48CendioOssmansetmessageid: <1620301608.26.0.636636620696.issue44052@roundup.psfhosted.org>
2021-05-06 11:46:48CendioOssmanlinkissue44052 messages
2021-05-06 11:46:48CendioOssmancreate