What do y all think about this Rather than subclassing `Test

Question

What do y all think about this Rather than subclassing `TestBase` tests can use Pytest style of top level functions The expectation would be for each test file to create a Pytest fixture that returns a `RuleRunner` type which wraps a SchedulerSession and exposes entry points like `create file` and `request product` Because it s a fixture you define it once and then each individual test gets a new copy of the `RuleRunner` which preserves the test isolation we need If you want multiple distinct setups in your test file you can create multiple fixtures The test then says which fixture it wants to use

hundreds-father-404 · Answer

An explicit goal of this project is to move towards Pytest style tests rather than unittest in line with the direction of the project the past year Pytest style tests are more composable and provide nice things like test parametrization and pre built fixtures `pants integration test py` is now changed to use Pytest style with the top level function `run pants ` `run rule ` has always been that way `TestBase request product ` is the only hold out

hundreds-father-404 · Answer

`RuleRunner` will take as optional args the normal classmethod boilerplate we have e g ```RuleRunner target types= PythonLibrary rules= python sources rules foo ``` Because it s a dataclass with a constructor we can do things like add a boolean parameter `register util rules bool = True` which will pre register those to ameloriate the issue with rule registration being icky

aloof-angle-91616 · Answer

i like that a lot best practices for unstable kwargs are in general to move it to a wrapper struct like this when it gets too complex i think