Original mail:JML's testtools has a TestResult subclass with a done() method. Thereason for this method is to allow doing things after the last test hasrun. While a result can infer 'first test' it can't infer 'last test'without ugliness like __del__.Some uses for this are: - reporting summary data - closing external resources like log files, sockets to remote machinesetc - <your idea here>This can be added quite safely I think - check for the attribute, and ifpresent call it.done() could be spelt differently - I don't think anyone would care.testsFinished()finished()etc.

Now, some refinements, as usual (for me at least) when considering afeature like this from an upstream perspective, where one's immediateuse cases are just special cases not general case, I've come up withsome refinements.Firstly, I said you can infer starting. But its asymmetrical to have a'run is finished' method that unittest will call, and not a 'run isabout to start' method too. So I think we should have two methods,paired. This will avoid people having to write inference code themselvesevery time.Secondly, TestCase.run(None) creates a result. I think it would be goodto make a clear statement about who, and when should and will call thesetwo new methods. Something like:"Whomever calls 'start' is responsible for calling 'done'." Concretelythis means that when TestCase implicitly creates a TestResult, it willcall start, and also call done.Thirdly, naming. I'm agnostic, but I'd lean towards something clear, andsomething that can't be easily confused with startTest/stopTest. e.g.'startTestRun' and 'stopTestRun' (just pluralising 'Test' to 'Tests'would be easily confusable).If this all makes sense, I'll write up some tests and put a patchtogether. I'm pasting this into the issue to, for folk that watch issuesonly :).

startTestRun and stopTestRun sound good to me.

Quite useful! Names are hard, but the ones proposed are pretty good.

I've written up a patch for this; it works with old result classes too.Hopefully the bugtracker will attach it in reply to this mail; if notI'll put in via the webui this evening.-Rob

The patch looks fine to me, except that it's missing documentationupdates.  The feature and names are fine too.

On Wed, 2009-04-15 at 23:19 +0000, Barry A. Warsaw wrote:> Barry A. Warsaw <barry@python.org> added the comment:> > The patch looks fine to me, except that it's missing documentation> updates.  The feature and names are fine too.Where do the docs go?-Rob

On Apr 15, 2009, at 7:43 PM, Robert Collins wrote:> Robert Collins <robertc@robertcollins.net> added the comment:>> On Wed, 2009-04-15 at 23:19 +0000, Barry A. Warsaw wrote:>> Barry A. Warsaw <barry@python.org> added the comment:>>>> The patch looks fine to me, except that it's missing documentation>> updates.  The feature and names are fine too.>> Where do the docs go?Doc/library/unittest.rst

Updates - docs, and fixes a couple of stubbed out upcalls in the loggingresult put in while bootsrapping.

Committed inrevision 72225.