How to use better-exceptions with unittest? #76
Comments
|
Hi @ocavue. The I don't know if this is possible to change this behavior. |
|
Found a simple but not perfect solution: import better_exceptions
import unittest
import sys
def wrap_test(func):
def new_func(*args, **kwargs):
try:
return func(*args, **kwargs)
except Exception as e:
exc, value, tb = sys.exc_info()
print(better_exceptions.format_exception(exc, value, tb))
raise e
return new_func
class MyTestCase(unittest.TestCase):
def add(self, a, b):
return a + b
@wrap_test
def test_add(self,):
r1 = self.add(1, 2)
r2 = self.add(2, "1")
self.assertTrue(r1, r2)
if __name__ == "__main__":
unittest.main()$ python3 test2.py
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "test2.py", line 9, in new_func
return func(*args, **kwargs)
│ │ └ {}
│ └ (<__main__.MyTestCase testMethod=test_add>,)
└ <function MyTestCase.test_add at 0x7fceeb6febf8>
File "test2.py", line 25, in test_add
r2 = self.add(2, '1')
└ <__main__.MyTestCase testMethod=test_add>
File "test2.py", line 20, in add
return a + b
│ └ '1'
└ 2
TypeError: unsupported operand type(s) for +: 'int' and 'str'
E
======================================================================
ERROR: test_add (__main__.MyTestCase)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "test2.py", line 13, in new_func
raise e
File "test2.py", line 9, in new_func
return func(*args, **kwargs)
File "test2.py", line 25, in test_add
r2 = self.add(2, "1")
File "test2.py", line 20, in add
return a + b
TypeError: unsupported operand type(s) for +: 'int' and 'str'
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ran 1 test in 0.014s
FAILED (errors=1) |
|
@Delgan how good/bad would it be to provide an option to |
|
@Qix- Honestly, I don't know, I don't have a strong opinion about this. The
Also, some users may require the same improvement for unit tests run using @ocavue In the meantime, you can also try this solution: import unittest
import better_exceptions
def patch(self, err, test):
return better_exceptions.format_exception(*err)
unittest.result.TestResult._exc_info_to_string = patch |
|
^ That seems like the better approach in terms of hooking, even if it's using an undocumented method. If that works @ocavue an you let us know? |
|
Although it uses an undocumented method, it seems to work well on all python versions. So I think this solution is great and we should write it in README. ( I used docker-compose to test it ) |
|
If you guys agree with me, I can create a PR with some tests about this hooking, to make sure that future python nightly version doesn't break this behavior. |
|
@ocavue yes please. :) |
|
@issuehunt has funded $40.00 to this issue.
|
issuehunt-oss
bot
added
the
💵 Funded on Issuehunt
|
Interesting bot. |
|
I have already posted a PR for this issue: #77 |
|
I think the reason why #77 is not merged yet is that I didn't click the "Slove Conversation" button before. 😂 |
|
"Solve Conversation" button ??? i never know github has such feature :P |
|
I forgot what its name is. I think it has the word "solve" (not slove) in it |
|
@Qix- has rewarded $28.00 to @ocavue. See it on IssueHunt
|
issuehunt-oss
bot
added
🎁 Rewarded on Issuehunt
I want to use better-exceptions to show error when using unittest. Here is my example:
test.py:
shell:
Is there any way to use better-exceptions to print exception stack?
IssueHunt Summary
Backers (Total: $40.00)
Submitted pull Requests
Tips
IssueHunt has been backed by the following sponsors. Become a sponsor
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: