On Feb 15, 2007, at 1:45 PM, Daniel Berger wrote:

> On Feb 15, 12:32 pm, Alex Young <a... / blackkettle.org> wrote:
>> Daniel Berger wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>
>>> What's the general approach folks use for skipping tests?  
>>> Sometimes I
>>> have some tests that I want to skip based on platform (usually MS
>>> Windows). I saw the 'flunk' method, but that's considered a failed
>>> test. I'm looking for something that doesn't treat it as success or
>>> failure.
>>
>> If you were to factor the platform-dependent tests out into their own
>> module which you can conditionally include into the test case, I  
>> think
>> you'd get what you were after.
>
> It's not a bad idea, but that still wouldn't explicitly indicate to a
> user that tests had been skipped - they would merely see fewer tests
> run. Plus, it's more work and I'm lazy. :)

I think it's a much better design though.

For an example of my concerns, what happens if your proposed skip()  
is called after a few assertions are run in a test?

James Edward Gray II