Move section about mark revamp and iteration to historical notes
This has been in place for a long time now, since 3.6.
This commit is contained in:
Bruno Oliveira
parent
7e8044f9b8
commit
a31098a74e
|
|
@ -4,6 +4,114 @@ Historical Notes
|
|||
This page lists features or behavior from previous versions of pytest which have changed over the years. They are
|
||||
kept here as a historical note so users looking at old code can find documentation related to them.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
.. _marker-revamp:
|
||||
|
||||
Marker revamp and iteration
|
||||
---------------------------
|
||||
|
||||
.. versionchanged:: 3.6
|
||||
|
||||
pytest's marker implementation traditionally worked by simply updating the ``__dict__`` attribute of functions to cumulatively add markers. As a result, markers would unintentionally be passed along class hierarchies in surprising ways. Further, the API for retrieving them was inconsistent, as markers from parameterization would be stored differently than markers applied using the ``@pytest.mark`` decorator and markers added via ``node.add_marker``.
|
||||
|
||||
This state of things made it technically next to impossible to use data from markers correctly without having a deep understanding of the internals, leading to subtle and hard to understand bugs in more advanced usages.
|
||||
|
||||
Depending on how a marker got declared/changed one would get either a ``MarkerInfo`` which might contain markers from sibling classes,
|
||||
``MarkDecorators`` when marks came from parameterization or from a ``node.add_marker`` call, discarding prior marks. Also ``MarkerInfo`` acts like a single mark, when it in fact represents a merged view on multiple marks with the same name.
|
||||
|
||||
On top of that markers were not accessible the same way for modules, classes, and functions/methods.
|
||||
In fact, markers were only accessible in functions, even if they were declared on classes/modules.
|
||||
|
||||
A new API to access markers has been introduced in pytest 3.6 in order to solve the problems with the initial design, providing :func:`_pytest.nodes.Node.iter_markers` method to iterate over markers in a consistent manner and reworking the internals, which solved great deal of problems with the initial design.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
.. _update marker code:
|
||||
|
||||
Updating code
|
||||
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
||||
|
||||
The old ``Node.get_marker(name)`` function is considered deprecated because it returns an internal ``MarkerInfo`` object
|
||||
which contains the merged name, ``*args`` and ``**kwargs`` of all the markers which apply to that node.
|
||||
|
||||
In general there are two scenarios on how markers should be handled:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Marks overwrite each other. Order matters but you only want to think of your mark as a single item. E.g.
|
||||
``log_level('info')`` at a module level can be overwritten by ``log_level('debug')`` for a specific test.
|
||||
|
||||
In this case, use ``Node.get_closest_marker(name)``:
|
||||
|
||||
.. code-block:: python
|
||||
|
||||
# replace this:
|
||||
marker = item.get_marker("log_level")
|
||||
if marker:
|
||||
level = marker.args[0]
|
||||
|
||||
# by this:
|
||||
marker = item.get_closest_marker("log_level")
|
||||
if marker:
|
||||
level = marker.args[0]
|
||||
|
||||
2. Marks compose in an additive manner. E.g. ``skipif(condition)`` marks mean you just want to evaluate all of them,
|
||||
order doesn't even matter. You probably want to think of your marks as a set here.
|
||||
|
||||
In this case iterate over each mark and handle their ``*args`` and ``**kwargs`` individually.
|
||||
|
||||
.. code-block:: python
|
||||
|
||||
# replace this
|
||||
skipif = item.get_marker("skipif")
|
||||
if skipif:
|
||||
for condition in skipif.args:
|
||||
# eval condition
|
||||
...
|
||||
|
||||
# by this:
|
||||
for skipif in item.iter_markers("skipif"):
|
||||
condition = skipif.args[0]
|
||||
# eval condition
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
If you are unsure or have any questions, please consider opening
|
||||
`an issue <https://github.com/pytest-dev/pytest/issues>`_.
|
||||
|
||||
Related issues
|
||||
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
||||
|
||||
Here is a non-exhaustive list of issues fixed by the new implementation:
|
||||
|
||||
* Marks don't pick up nested classes (`#199 <https://github.com/pytest-dev/pytest/issues/199>`_).
|
||||
|
||||
* Markers stain on all related classes (`#568 <https://github.com/pytest-dev/pytest/issues/568>`_).
|
||||
|
||||
* Combining marks - args and kwargs calculation (`#2897 <https://github.com/pytest-dev/pytest/issues/2897>`_).
|
||||
|
||||
* ``request.node.get_marker('name')`` returns ``None`` for markers applied in classes (`#902 <https://github.com/pytest-dev/pytest/issues/902>`_).
|
||||
|
||||
* Marks applied in parametrize are stored as markdecorator (`#2400 <https://github.com/pytest-dev/pytest/issues/2400>`_).
|
||||
|
||||
* Fix marker interaction in a backward incompatible way (`#1670 <https://github.com/pytest-dev/pytest/issues/1670>`_).
|
||||
|
||||
* Refactor marks to get rid of the current "marks transfer" mechanism (`#2363 <https://github.com/pytest-dev/pytest/issues/2363>`_).
|
||||
|
||||
* Introduce FunctionDefinition node, use it in generate_tests (`#2522 <https://github.com/pytest-dev/pytest/issues/2522>`_).
|
||||
|
||||
* Remove named marker attributes and collect markers in items (`#891 <https://github.com/pytest-dev/pytest/issues/891>`_).
|
||||
|
||||
* skipif mark from parametrize hides module level skipif mark (`#1540 <https://github.com/pytest-dev/pytest/issues/1540>`_).
|
||||
|
||||
* skipif + parametrize not skipping tests (`#1296 <https://github.com/pytest-dev/pytest/issues/1296>`_).
|
||||
|
||||
* Marker transfer incompatible with inheritance (`#535 <https://github.com/pytest-dev/pytest/issues/535>`_).
|
||||
|
||||
More details can be found in the `original PR <https://github.com/pytest-dev/pytest/pull/3317>`_.
|
||||
|
||||
.. note::
|
||||
|
||||
in a future major relase of pytest we will introduce class based markers,
|
||||
at which point markers will no longer be limited to instances of :py:class:`Mark`.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
cache plugin integrated into the core
|
||||
-------------------------------------
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
106
doc/en/mark.rst
106
doc/en/mark.rst
|
|
@ -74,109 +74,3 @@ enforce this validation in your project by adding ``--strict-markers`` to ``addo
|
|||
markers =
|
||||
slow: marks tests as slow (deselect with '-m "not slow"')
|
||||
serial
|
||||
|
||||
.. _marker-revamp:
|
||||
|
||||
Marker revamp and iteration
|
||||
---------------------------
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
pytest's marker implementation traditionally worked by simply updating the ``__dict__`` attribute of functions to cumulatively add markers. As a result, markers would unintentionally be passed along class hierarchies in surprising ways. Further, the API for retrieving them was inconsistent, as markers from parameterization would be stored differently than markers applied using the ``@pytest.mark`` decorator and markers added via ``node.add_marker``.
|
||||
|
||||
This state of things made it technically next to impossible to use data from markers correctly without having a deep understanding of the internals, leading to subtle and hard to understand bugs in more advanced usages.
|
||||
|
||||
Depending on how a marker got declared/changed one would get either a ``MarkerInfo`` which might contain markers from sibling classes,
|
||||
``MarkDecorators`` when marks came from parameterization or from a ``node.add_marker`` call, discarding prior marks. Also ``MarkerInfo`` acts like a single mark, when it in fact represents a merged view on multiple marks with the same name.
|
||||
|
||||
On top of that markers were not accessible the same way for modules, classes, and functions/methods.
|
||||
In fact, markers were only accessible in functions, even if they were declared on classes/modules.
|
||||
|
||||
A new API to access markers has been introduced in pytest 3.6 in order to solve the problems with the initial design, providing :func:`_pytest.nodes.Node.iter_markers` method to iterate over markers in a consistent manner and reworking the internals, which solved great deal of problems with the initial design.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
.. _update marker code:
|
||||
|
||||
Updating code
|
||||
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
||||
|
||||
The old ``Node.get_marker(name)`` function is considered deprecated because it returns an internal ``MarkerInfo`` object
|
||||
which contains the merged name, ``*args`` and ``**kwargs`` of all the markers which apply to that node.
|
||||
|
||||
In general there are two scenarios on how markers should be handled:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Marks overwrite each other. Order matters but you only want to think of your mark as a single item. E.g.
|
||||
``log_level('info')`` at a module level can be overwritten by ``log_level('debug')`` for a specific test.
|
||||
|
||||
In this case, use ``Node.get_closest_marker(name)``:
|
||||
|
||||
.. code-block:: python
|
||||
|
||||
# replace this:
|
||||
marker = item.get_marker("log_level")
|
||||
if marker:
|
||||
level = marker.args[0]
|
||||
|
||||
# by this:
|
||||
marker = item.get_closest_marker("log_level")
|
||||
if marker:
|
||||
level = marker.args[0]
|
||||
|
||||
2. Marks compose in an additive manner. E.g. ``skipif(condition)`` marks mean you just want to evaluate all of them,
|
||||
order doesn't even matter. You probably want to think of your marks as a set here.
|
||||
|
||||
In this case iterate over each mark and handle their ``*args`` and ``**kwargs`` individually.
|
||||
|
||||
.. code-block:: python
|
||||
|
||||
# replace this
|
||||
skipif = item.get_marker("skipif")
|
||||
if skipif:
|
||||
for condition in skipif.args:
|
||||
# eval condition
|
||||
...
|
||||
|
||||
# by this:
|
||||
for skipif in item.iter_markers("skipif"):
|
||||
condition = skipif.args[0]
|
||||
# eval condition
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
If you are unsure or have any questions, please consider opening
|
||||
`an issue <https://github.com/pytest-dev/pytest/issues>`_.
|
||||
|
||||
Related issues
|
||||
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
||||
|
||||
Here is a non-exhaustive list of issues fixed by the new implementation:
|
||||
|
||||
* Marks don't pick up nested classes (`#199 <https://github.com/pytest-dev/pytest/issues/199>`_).
|
||||
|
||||
* Markers stain on all related classes (`#568 <https://github.com/pytest-dev/pytest/issues/568>`_).
|
||||
|
||||
* Combining marks - args and kwargs calculation (`#2897 <https://github.com/pytest-dev/pytest/issues/2897>`_).
|
||||
|
||||
* ``request.node.get_marker('name')`` returns ``None`` for markers applied in classes (`#902 <https://github.com/pytest-dev/pytest/issues/902>`_).
|
||||
|
||||
* Marks applied in parametrize are stored as markdecorator (`#2400 <https://github.com/pytest-dev/pytest/issues/2400>`_).
|
||||
|
||||
* Fix marker interaction in a backward incompatible way (`#1670 <https://github.com/pytest-dev/pytest/issues/1670>`_).
|
||||
|
||||
* Refactor marks to get rid of the current "marks transfer" mechanism (`#2363 <https://github.com/pytest-dev/pytest/issues/2363>`_).
|
||||
|
||||
* Introduce FunctionDefinition node, use it in generate_tests (`#2522 <https://github.com/pytest-dev/pytest/issues/2522>`_).
|
||||
|
||||
* Remove named marker attributes and collect markers in items (`#891 <https://github.com/pytest-dev/pytest/issues/891>`_).
|
||||
|
||||
* skipif mark from parametrize hides module level skipif mark (`#1540 <https://github.com/pytest-dev/pytest/issues/1540>`_).
|
||||
|
||||
* skipif + parametrize not skipping tests (`#1296 <https://github.com/pytest-dev/pytest/issues/1296>`_).
|
||||
|
||||
* Marker transfer incompatible with inheritance (`#535 <https://github.com/pytest-dev/pytest/issues/535>`_).
|
||||
|
||||
More details can be found in the `original PR <https://github.com/pytest-dev/pytest/pull/3317>`_.
|
||||
|
||||
.. note::
|
||||
|
||||
in a future major relase of pytest we will introduce class based markers,
|
||||
at which point markers will no longer be limited to instances of :py:class:`Mark`.
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Loading…
Reference in New Issue