Skip to main content
9 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Jan 13, 2015 at 1:50 comment added Chris Hayes @DocBrown I never said you claimed that. Just trying to add to the conversation here.
Jan 12, 2015 at 22:09 comment added Doc Brown @ChrisHayes: I wrote "there is no need", not "there is no value" in it.
Jan 12, 2015 at 21:49 comment added Chris Hayes @DocBrown The other value in explicitly checking with an assert is that it becomes clear to anyone examining the test that this is a failure of the code under test, and not the test itself. When my tests encounter unexpected exceptions, I always have to spend some time figuring out which one is actually wrong.
Jan 12, 2015 at 20:16 vote accept Mihai
Jan 12, 2015 at 16:06 comment added Doc Brown I think in the current situation the error message would probably be informative enough. But in general, that might not be the case. That's why I agree to you that the general approach for a case like this should be to think of a "merge", using two asserts. If it turns out that the test can be further simplified by leaving out one of the assert, fine.
Jan 12, 2015 at 16:00 comment added Telastyn @DocBrown - I assumed as much, but I'm not familiar with Python's error messages to know if there may be value in having an assert failure instead of random exception/error for informative reasons.
Jan 12, 2015 at 15:58 comment added Doc Brown I upvoted your answer though it misses one minor point. In Python, the second test will also fail when my_function does not return exactly two values, without any assert - because the assignment will result in an exception. So there is actually no need to use multiple asserts and two checks to test the same thing.
Jan 12, 2015 at 15:39 history edited Telastyn CC BY-SA 3.0
deleted 1 character in body
Jan 12, 2015 at 15:34 history answered Telastyn CC BY-SA 3.0