Add assertIsSubclass and assertNotIsSubclass to unittest.TestCase

[patricksmith]

BPO	14819
Nosy	@ezio-melotti, @bitdancer, @voidspace
Files	assertissubclass.patch: Patch that adds assertIsSubclass and assertNotIsSubclass to unittest.TestCase

^{Note: these values reflect the state of the issue at the time it was migrated and might not reflect the current state.}

Show more details

GitHub fields:

assignee = None
closed_at = <Date 2012-05-16.16:19:46.601>
created_at = <Date 2012-05-15.21:13:14.536>
labels = ['type-feature', 'library']
title = 'Add `assertIsSubclass` and `assertNotIsSubclass` to `unittest.TestCase`'
updated_at = <Date 2012-05-16.16:19:46.600>
user = 'https://bugs.python.org/patricksmith'

bugs.python.org fields:

activity = <Date 2012-05-16.16:19:46.600>
actor = 'r.david.murray'
assignee = 'none'
closed = True
closed_date = <Date 2012-05-16.16:19:46.601>
closer = 'r.david.murray'
components = ['Library (Lib)']
creation = <Date 2012-05-15.21:13:14.536>
creator = 'patricksmith'
dependencies = []
files = ['25600']
hgrepos = []
issue_num = 14819
keywords = ['patch']
message_count = 5.0
messages = ['160762', '160764', '160844', '160875', '160878']
nosy_count = 5.0
nosy_names = ['ezio.melotti', 'r.david.murray', 'michael.foord', 'Brian.Jones', 'patricksmith']
pr_nums = []
priority = 'normal'
resolution = 'rejected'
stage = 'resolved'
status = 'closed'
superseder = None
type = 'enhancement'
url = 'https://bugs.python.org/issue14819'
versions = ['Python 3.3']

[patricksmith]

The attached patch adds two helper methods to unittest.TestCase: assertIsSubclass and assertIsNotSubclass. These methods are similar to the assertIsInstance and assertIsNotInstance methods that are already part of unittest.TestCase. They allow one to test if a class is a subclass of another class using the issubclass builtin.

These methods can be used like:
self.assertIsSubclass(cls, parent_cls)

These new methods provide a nicer error message and more consistent interface over the alternatives:
self.assertTrue(issubclass(cls, parent_cls))
assert issubclass(cls, parent_cls)

[ezio-melotti]

Hi, this has been discussed already, and we took the decision to leave these out, since checking for subclasses is not as common as checking the type.
If needed, this could still be implemented by the user, and possibly they could be added as recipes to the unittest doc.
Michael what do you think?

[BrianJones]

I can't find a previous discussion of this topic. If you know the list it happened on, or the bug#, let me know as I'd be curious to see the discussion.

While I could concede that checking type is arguably a more common case than checking ancestry, I think that checks like assertIsSubclass have a lot of value.

First, if you view your collection of unit tests as pools of change detectors, this type of check is very valuable in order to detect changes in ancestry that result from a refactoring.

Second, if you use a test-driven style of development, this is a very convenient method to have as your tests and code evolve, because the amount of code you have to write to create a failing test becomes a one-liner.

As an aside, I *would* like to see the submitted patch provide more detail upon failure. Namely, if X is not a subclass of Y, it would be nice to know what it *is* a subclass of in the resulting output.

[ezio-melotti]

I couldn't find any pointer to the discussion (maybe it happened on IRC), but the general goal is to provide only the most used/important assert methods and avoid bloating the API with less common ones.

[bitdancer]

I agree that testing for subclass is a rather specialized thing, and thus should be defined by a project that needs it. Normal API-centric unit tests shouldn't, IMO, care whether X is a subclass of Y. If you are using it to write a failing unit test to "drive" refactoring from one class to another, that is, I think, a very good example of a specialized use case (one I would certainly never use, for example) and you should just put it in your own project test codebase.