3 ms·

I love pytest, and use it with Hypothesis[0] for property based testing. I also enjoy using pytest-bdd[1] [0] - https://hypothesis.readthedocs.io/en/latest/ ht

by linkdd 3y ago

I love pytest, and use it with Hypothesis[0] for property based testing. I also enjoy using pytest-bdd[1] [0] - https://hypothesis.readthedocs.io/en/latest/ https://hypothesis.readthedocs.io/en/latest/ [1] - https://github.com/pytest-dev/pytest-bdd https://github.com/pytest-dev/pytest-bdd

hitchstory 3y ago
If you like pytest and BDD I'd encourage you to check out my pytest library: https://github.com/hitchdev/hitchstory https://github.com/hitchdev/hitchstory With it you can write integration tests with typesafe YAML which double as user friendly documentation. It also has inheritance (which gherkin doesnt) - e.g. a "buy golf clubs" story can inherit from "put golf clubs in shopping basket" story which can inherit from a "log in" story, etc.
- linkdd 3y ago
  Thank you. Your library seems nice. Unfortunately, I have to say it... I hate YAML with a passion, k8s, github actions/gitlab ci, ansible, etc... When I'm doing ops jobs, I feel like I'm coding in YAML. Btw, this hate for YAML birthed https://linkdd.github.io/tricorder/ https://linkdd.github.io/tricorder/ :P
  - hitchstory 3y ago
    I understand the hate. I created StrictYAML, which this tool uses, because of it (see the Norway problem - that was me). Type safety is paramount and regular YAML does not have any type safety. I also understand the hate from the perspective of tools which misuse YAML - putting loops, variables, conditionals, etc. in like ansible or CI tools do, like your tool complains about. I hate that too and haven't done it. I was somewhat inspired by ansible in the beginning but Ive come to understand that it was the wrong approach for configuration management and that a turing complete language is a better approach (i.e. like your rust tool). I dont want to throw the baby out with the bathwater though. The syntax is a very clean way of displaying hierarchical data, which high level stories need. Nothing else matches - Gherkin is awful at that.
    - linkdd 3y ago
      > I created StrictYAML, which this tool uses, because of it I'll look more closely into it then :) > Gherkin is awful at that. When I use BDD, it's because I'm handed down scenarii written by non-tech people. And it's always in the Gherkin format, then I chose the right Gherkin engine for the right tech stack. That might be cucumber, or another.
      - hitchstory 3y ago
        >When I use BDD, it's because I'm handed down scenarii written by non-tech people. And it's always in the Gherkin format Thats interesting. You're the first person I've heard of who actually did that rather than just talking about it. I was under the impression that this worked ok for simple scenarios but with complex scenarios I think the syntax buckles - either you end up with very long, repetitive scenarios or vague scenarios. Or even both.
        linkdd 3y ago
        > you end up with very long, repetitive scenarios or vague scenarios. Or even both. Almost correct :D The BDD scenarii also act as "user stories" in a Scrum/Agile workflow. It was a nice way to re-use what the product owner requested.

by linkdd 3y ago

hitchstory 3y ago

If you like pytest and BDD I'd encourage you to check out my pytest library: https://github.com/hitchdev/hitchstory https://github.com/hitchdev/hitchstory With it you can write integration tests with typesafe YAML which double as user friendly documentation. It also has inheritance (which gherkin doesnt) - e.g. a "buy golf clubs" story can inherit from "put golf clubs in shopping basket" story which can inherit from a "log in" story, etc.

linkdd 3y ago
Thank you. Your library seems nice. Unfortunately, I have to say it... I hate YAML with a passion, k8s, github actions/gitlab ci, ansible, etc... When I'm doing ops jobs, I feel like I'm coding in YAML. Btw, this hate for YAML birthed https://linkdd.github.io/tricorder/ https://linkdd.github.io/tricorder/ :P
- hitchstory 3y ago
  I understand the hate. I created StrictYAML, which this tool uses, because of it (see the Norway problem - that was me). Type safety is paramount and regular YAML does not have any type safety. I also understand the hate from the perspective of tools which misuse YAML - putting loops, variables, conditionals, etc. in like ansible or CI tools do, like your tool complains about. I hate that too and haven't done it. I was somewhat inspired by ansible in the beginning but Ive come to understand that it was the wrong approach for configuration management and that a turing complete language is a better approach (i.e. like your rust tool). I dont want to throw the baby out with the bathwater though. The syntax is a very clean way of displaying hierarchical data, which high level stories need. Nothing else matches - Gherkin is awful at that.
  - linkdd 3y ago
    > I created StrictYAML, which this tool uses, because of it I'll look more closely into it then :) > Gherkin is awful at that. When I use BDD, it's because I'm handed down scenarii written by non-tech people. And it's always in the Gherkin format, then I chose the right Gherkin engine for the right tech stack. That might be cucumber, or another.
    - hitchstory 3y ago
      >When I use BDD, it's because I'm handed down scenarii written by non-tech people. And it's always in the Gherkin format Thats interesting. You're the first person I've heard of who actually did that rather than just talking about it. I was under the impression that this worked ok for simple scenarios but with complex scenarios I think the syntax buckles - either you end up with very long, repetitive scenarios or vague scenarios. Or even both.
      - linkdd 3y ago
        > you end up with very long, repetitive scenarios or vague scenarios. Or even both. Almost correct :D The BDD scenarii also act as "user stories" in a Scrum/Agile workflow. It was a nice way to re-use what the product owner requested.