Removing all instances of unittest #4472
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Pradyot Ranjan <99216956+pradyotRanjan@users.noreply.github.com>
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## develop #4472 +/- ##
========================================
Coverage 99.46% 99.46%
========================================
Files 293 293
Lines 22332 22332
========================================
Hits 22212 22212
Misses 120 120 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
Signed-off-by: Pradyot Ranjan <99216956+pradyotRanjan@users.noreply.github.com>
…/PyBaMM into implementing-pytest-rule Merge
prady0t
requested review from
martinjrobins,
Saransh-cpp,
agriyakhetarpal,
kratman and
arjxn-py
as code owners
|
I've added two rules, PT027 and PT009. These won't detect the usage of unittest, but is enough to prevent someone from writing tests in future as it prevents using unittest style assertions. |
| "PT027", # remove unittest style assertion | ||
| "PT009", # Use pytest.raises instead of unittest-style |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you instead try turning on the "PT" rule commented above and see what happens?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There are a lot of style failures. Should I try fixing those and keep the PT rule?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If there are too many, then a separate PR for this would be better.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
A separate PR sounds good then. Could you create one after this, @prady0t?
WIP, will be adding ruff rule here.