| Writing Python Regression Tests |
| ------------------------------- |
| Skip Montanaro |
| (skip@mojam.com) |
| |
| |
| Introduction |
| |
| If you add a new module to Python or modify the functionality of an existing |
| module, you should write one or more test cases to exercise that new |
| functionality. There are different ways to do this within the regression |
| testing facility provided with Python; any particular test should use only |
| one of these options. Each option requires writing a test module using the |
| conventions of the the selected option: |
| |
| - PyUnit based tests |
| - doctest based tests |
| - "traditional" Python test modules |
| |
| Regardless of the mechanics of the testing approach you choose, |
| you will be writing unit tests (isolated tests of functions and objects |
| defined by the module) using white box techniques. Unlike black box |
| testing, where you only have the external interfaces to guide your test case |
| writing, in white box testing you can see the code being tested and tailor |
| your test cases to exercise it more completely. In particular, you will be |
| able to refer to the C and Python code in the CVS repository when writing |
| your regression test cases. |
| |
| |
| PyUnit based tests |
| |
| The PyUnit framework is based on the ideas of unit testing as espoused |
| by Kent Beck and the Extreme Programming (XP) movement. The specific |
| interface provided by the framework is tightly based on the JUnit |
| Java implementation of Beck's original SmallTalk test framework. Please |
| see the documentation of the unittest module for detailed information on |
| the interface and general guidelines on writing PyUnit based tests. |
| |
| The test_support helper module provides a single function for use by |
| PyUnit based tests in the Python regression testing framework: |
| run_unittest() takes a unittest.TestCase derived class as a parameter |
| and runs the tests defined in that class. All test methods in the |
| Python regression framework have names that start with "test_" and use |
| lower-case names with words separated with underscores. |
| |
| |
| doctest based tests |
| |
| Tests written to use doctest are actually part of the docstrings for |
| the module being tested. Each test is written as a display of an |
| interactive session, including the Python prompts, statements that would |
| be typed by the user, and the output of those statements (including |
| tracebacks, although only the exception msg needs to be retained then). |
| The module in the test package is simply a wrapper that causes doctest |
| to run over the tests in the module. The test for the difflib module |
| provides a convenient example: |
| |
| import difflib, test_support |
| test_support.run_doctest(difflib) |
| |
| If the test is successful, nothing is written to stdout (so you should not |
| create a corresponding output/test_difflib file), but running regrtest |
| with -v will give a detailed report, the same as if passing -v to doctest. |
| |
| A second argument can be passed to run_doctest to tell doctest to search |
| sys.argv for -v instead of using test_support's idea of verbosity. This |
| is useful for writing doctest-based tests that aren't simply running a |
| doctest'ed Lib module, but contain the doctests themselves. Then at |
| times you may want to run such a test directly as a doctest, independent |
| of the regrtest framework. The tail end of test_descrtut.py is a good |
| example: |
| |
| def test_main(verbose=None): |
| import test_support, test.test_descrtut |
| test_support.run_doctest(test.test_descrtut, verbose) |
| |
| if __name__ == "__main__": |
| test_main(1) |
| |
| If run via regrtest, test_main() is called (by regrtest) without specifying |
| verbose, and then test_support's idea of verbosity is used. But when |
| run directly, test_main(1) is called, and then doctest's idea of verbosity |
| is used. |
| |
| See the documentation for the doctest module for information on |
| writing tests using the doctest framework. |
| |
| |
| "traditional" Python test modules |
| |
| The mechanics of how the "traditional" test system operates are fairly |
| straightforward. When a test case is run, the output is compared with the |
| expected output that is stored in .../Lib/test/output. If the test runs to |
| completion and the actual and expected outputs match, the test succeeds, if |
| not, it fails. If an ImportError or test_support.TestSkipped error is |
| raised, the test is not run. |
| |
| |
| Executing Test Cases |
| |
| If you are writing test cases for module spam, you need to create a file |
| in .../Lib/test named test_spam.py. In addition, if the tests are expected |
| to write to stdout during a successful run, you also need to create an |
| expected output file in .../Lib/test/output named test_spam ("..." |
| represents the top-level directory in the Python source tree, the directory |
| containing the configure script). If needed, generate the initial version |
| of the test output file by executing: |
| |
| ./python Lib/test/regrtest.py -g test_spam.py |
| |
| from the top-level directory. |
| |
| Any time you modify test_spam.py you need to generate a new expected |
| output file. Don't forget to desk check the generated output to make sure |
| it's really what you expected to find! All in all it's usually better |
| not to have an expected-out file (note that doctest- and unittest-based |
| tests do not). |
| |
| To run a single test after modifying a module, simply run regrtest.py |
| without the -g flag: |
| |
| ./python Lib/test/regrtest.py test_spam.py |
| |
| While debugging a regression test, you can of course execute it |
| independently of the regression testing framework and see what it prints: |
| |
| ./python Lib/test/test_spam.py |
| |
| To run the entire test suite: |
| |
| [UNIX, + other platforms where "make" works] Make the "test" target at the |
| top level: |
| |
| make test |
| |
| {WINDOWS] Run rt.bat from your PCBuild directory. Read the comments at |
| the top of rt.bat for the use of special -d, -O and -q options processed |
| by rt.bat. |
| |
| [OTHER] You can simply execute the two runs of regrtest (optimized and |
| non-optimized) directly: |
| |
| ./python Lib/test/regrtest.py |
| ./python -O Lib/test/regrtest.py |
| |
| But note that this way picks up whatever .pyc and .pyo files happen to be |
| around. The makefile and rt.bat ways run the tests twice, the first time |
| removing all .pyc and .pyo files from the subtree rooted at Lib/. |
| |
| Test cases generate output based upon values computed by the test code. |
| When executed, regrtest.py compares the actual output generated by executing |
| the test case with the expected output and reports success or failure. It |
| stands to reason that if the actual and expected outputs are to match, they |
| must not contain any machine dependencies. This means your test cases |
| should not print out absolute machine addresses (e.g. the return value of |
| the id() builtin function) or floating point numbers with large numbers of |
| significant digits (unless you understand what you are doing!). |
| |
| |
| Test Case Writing Tips |
| |
| Writing good test cases is a skilled task and is too complex to discuss in |
| detail in this short document. Many books have been written on the subject. |
| I'll show my age by suggesting that Glenford Myers' "The Art of Software |
| Testing", published in 1979, is still the best introduction to the subject |
| available. It is short (177 pages), easy to read, and discusses the major |
| elements of software testing, though its publication predates the |
| object-oriented software revolution, so doesn't cover that subject at all. |
| Unfortunately, it is very expensive (about $100 new). If you can borrow it |
| or find it used (around $20), I strongly urge you to pick up a copy. |
| |
| The most important goal when writing test cases is to break things. A test |
| case that doesn't uncover a bug is much less valuable than one that does. |
| In designing test cases you should pay attention to the following: |
| |
| * Your test cases should exercise all the functions and objects defined |
| in the module, not just the ones meant to be called by users of your |
| module. This may require you to write test code that uses the module |
| in ways you don't expect (explicitly calling internal functions, for |
| example - see test_atexit.py). |
| |
| * You should consider any boundary values that may tickle exceptional |
| conditions (e.g. if you were writing regression tests for division, |
| you might well want to generate tests with numerators and denominators |
| at the limits of floating point and integer numbers on the machine |
| performing the tests as well as a denominator of zero). |
| |
| * You should exercise as many paths through the code as possible. This |
| may not always be possible, but is a goal to strive for. In |
| particular, when considering if statements (or their equivalent), you |
| want to create test cases that exercise both the true and false |
| branches. For loops, you should create test cases that exercise the |
| loop zero, one and multiple times. |
| |
| * You should test with obviously invalid input. If you know that a |
| function requires an integer input, try calling it with other types of |
| objects to see how it responds. |
| |
| * You should test with obviously out-of-range input. If the domain of a |
| function is only defined for positive integers, try calling it with a |
| negative integer. |
| |
| * If you are going to fix a bug that wasn't uncovered by an existing |
| test, try to write a test case that exposes the bug (preferably before |
| fixing it). |
| |
| * If you need to create a temporary file, you can use the filename in |
| test_support.TESTFN to do so. It is important to remove the file |
| when done; other tests should be able to use the name without cleaning |
| up after your test. |
| |
| |
| Regression Test Writing Rules |
| |
| Each test case is different. There is no "standard" form for a Python |
| regression test case, though there are some general rules (note that |
| these mostly apply only to the "classic" tests; unittest- and doctest- |
| based tests should follow the conventions natural to those frameworks): |
| |
| * If your test case detects a failure, raise TestFailed (found in |
| test_support). |
| |
| * Import everything you'll need as early as possible. |
| |
| * If you'll be importing objects from a module that is at least |
| partially platform-dependent, only import those objects you need for |
| the current test case to avoid spurious ImportError exceptions that |
| prevent the test from running to completion. |
| |
| * Print all your test case results using the print statement. For |
| non-fatal errors, print an error message (or omit a successful |
| completion print) to indicate the failure, but proceed instead of |
| raising TestFailed. |
| |
| * Use "assert" sparingly, if at all. It's usually better to just print |
| what you got, and rely on regrtest's got-vs-expected comparison to |
| catch deviations from what you expect. assert statements aren't |
| executed at all when regrtest is run in -O mode; and, because they |
| cause the test to stop immediately, can lead to a long & tedious |
| test-fix, test-fix, test-fix, ... cycle when things are badly broken |
| (and note that "badly broken" often includes running the test suite |
| for the first time on new platforms or under new implementations of |
| the language). |
| |
| |
| Miscellaneous |
| |
| There is a test_support module you can import from your test case. It |
| provides the following useful objects: |
| |
| * TestFailed - raise this exception when your regression test detects a |
| failure. |
| |
| * TestSkipped - raise this if the test could not be run because the |
| platform doesn't offer all the required facilities (like large |
| file support), even if all the required modules are available. |
| |
| * verbose - you can use this variable to control print output. Many |
| modules use it. Search for "verbose" in the test_*.py files to see |
| lots of examples. |
| |
| * verify(condition, reason='test failed'). Use this instead of |
| |
| assert condition[, reason] |
| |
| verify() has two advantages over assert: it works even in -O mode, |
| and it raises TestFailed on failure instead of AssertionError. |
| |
| * TESTFN - a string that should always be used as the filename when you |
| need to create a temp file. Also use try/finally to ensure that your |
| temp files are deleted before your test completes. Note that you |
| cannot unlink an open file on all operating systems, so also be sure |
| to close temp files before trying to unlink them. |
| |
| * sortdict(dict) - acts like repr(dict.items()), but sorts the items |
| first. This is important when printing a dict value, because the |
| order of items produced by dict.items() is not defined by the |
| language. |
| |
| * findfile(file) - you can call this function to locate a file somewhere |
| along sys.path or in the Lib/test tree - see test_linuxaudiodev.py for |
| an example of its use. |
| |
| * use_large_resources - true iff tests requiring large time or space |
| should be run. |
| |
| * fcmp(x,y) - you can call this function to compare two floating point |
| numbers when you expect them to only be approximately equal withing a |
| fuzz factor (test_support.FUZZ, which defaults to 1e-6). |
| |
| NOTE: Always import something from test_support like so: |
| |
| from test_support import verbose |
| |
| or like so: |
| |
| import test_support |
| ... use test_support.verbose in the code ... |
| |
| Never import anything from test_support like this: |
| |
| from test.test_support import verbose |
| |
| "test" is a package already, so can refer to modules it contains without |
| "test." qualification. If you do an explicit "test.xxx" qualification, that |
| can fool Python into believing test.xxx is a module distinct from the xxx |
| in the current package, and you can end up importing two distinct copies of |
| xxx. This is especially bad if xxx=test_support, as regrtest.py can (and |
| routinely does) overwrite its "verbose" and "use_large_resources" |
| attributes: if you get a second copy of test_support loaded, it may not |
| have the same values for those as regrtest intended. |
| |
| |
| Python and C statement coverage results are currently available at |
| |
| http://www.musi-cal.com/~skip/python/Python/dist/src/ |
| |
| As of this writing (July, 2000) these results are being generated nightly. |
| You can refer to the summaries and the test coverage output files to see |
| where coverage is adequate or lacking and write test cases to beef up the |
| coverage. |
| |
| |
| Some Non-Obvious regrtest Features |
| |
| * Automagic test detection: When you create a new test file |
| test_spam.py, you do not need to modify regrtest (or anything else) |
| to advertise its existence. regrtest searches for and runs all |
| modules in the test directory with names of the form test_xxx.py. |
| |
| * Miranda output: If, when running test_spam.py, regrtest does not |
| find an expected-output file test/output/test_spam, regrtest |
| pretends that it did find one, containing the single line |
| |
| test_spam |
| |
| This allows new tests that don't expect to print anything to stdout |
| to not bother creating expected-output files. |
| |
| * Two-stage testing: To run test_spam.py, regrtest imports test_spam |
| as a module. Most tests run to completion as a side-effect of |
| getting imported. After importing test_spam, regrtest also executes |
| test_spam.test_main(), if test_spam has a "test_main" attribute. |
| This is rarely needed, and you shouldn't create a module global |
| with name test_main unless you're specifically exploiting this |
| gimmick. In such cases, please put a comment saying so near your |
| def test_main, because this feature is so rarely used it's not |
| obvious when reading the test code. |