2 ms·
Oh, I see, you misunderstood me. I did not claim that “most projects would choose Unittest”. I claimed that for many projects, it would be wise to consider us
by teddyh 5y ago
Oh, I see, you misunderstood me. I did not claim that “most projects would choose Unittest”. I claimed that for many projects, it would be wise to consider using unittest instead of, for example, pytest, as a way of minimizing usage of third-party modules.
- robertlagrant 5y ago> Every individual third-party library will have to overcome that threshold by being useful enough. And I doubt that, for most people, pytest is that much better to work with than the built-in unittest is. This sounds more like you're saying that pytest wouldn't overcome that threshold; I was saying that has already happened, at least according to the article's statement.
- teddyh 5y agoMaybe. But I would personally guess that most people nowadays are way too eager to use a new library than would be good for their projects in the long run. I very much doubt that most new libraries are that much better than the Python standard library counterparts that it’s worth using them in non-toy projects. Of course, all progress depends on the unreasonable man, etc.