Great to see an initiative like this in testing! A few questions after a glance:
In your [blog post](
https://machinekoder.com/testing-ros-powered-robots-pytest/) you said:
> The really great thing about pytest is that it really makes unit testing easy and quick. To shorten you feedback loops I recommend you to clearly distinguish between unit tests and ROS node or integration tests.
After reading the blog, I didn't quite get how `pytest` makes unit testing "easy and quick". I mean it looks like it does, but did you find it easier and quicker than `nosetests` that ROS is [already integrated with](
http://docs.ros.org/api/catkin/html/howto/format2/python_nose_configuration.html)? I'm simply curious, as ROS allows to run unit testing by `nosetests` as well as integrate it into Node testing.
> ROS seems to pick up the test data very well. However, I noticed that failing tests still dont trigger a failure when running rostests (but the log/terminal output shows the error). I would appreciate any input on why this is the case.
Not sure what you mean by "ROS seems to pick up the test data very well". But I'd agree the test result is not the easiest to read. In your particular case, have you tried [`catkin_test_results`](
http://docs.ros.org/api/catkin/html/howto/format2/run_tests.html)?
---
[Visit Topic](
https://discourse.ros.org/t/pytest-support-for-ros-rostest/4990/3) or reply to this email to respond.
If you do not want to receive messages from ros-users please use the unsubscribe link below. If you use the one above, you will stop all of ros-users from receiving updates.
______________________________________________________________________________
ros-users mailing list
ros-users@lists.ros.org
http://lists.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users
Unsubscribe: <
http://lists.ros.org/mailman//options/ros-users>
(text/plain)