以下是我的解决方案。我发现这个方法很有用:

Should work for unittest.Testcase and unittest discover Have a set of tests to be run for different parameter settings. Very simple and no dependency on other packages import unittest class BaseClass(unittest.TestCase): def setUp(self): self.param = 2 self.base = 2 def test_me(self): self.assertGreaterEqual(5, self.param+self.base) def test_me_too(self): self.assertLessEqual(3, self.param+self.base) class Child_One(BaseClass): def setUp(self): BaseClass.setUp(self) self.param = 4 class Child_Two(BaseClass): def setUp(self): BaseClass.setUp(self) self.param = 1

只使用元类，如这里所示;

class DocTestMeta(type):
    """
    Test functions are generated in metaclass due to the way some
    test loaders work. For example, setupClass() won't get called
    unless there are other existing test methods, and will also
    prevent unit test loader logic being called before the test
    methods have been defined.
    """
    def __init__(self, name, bases, attrs):
        super(DocTestMeta, self).__init__(name, bases, attrs)

    def __new__(cls, name, bases, attrs):
        def func(self):
            """Inner test method goes here"""
            self.assertTrue(1)

        func.__name__ = 'test_sample'
        attrs[func.__name__] = func
        return super(DocTestMeta, cls).__new__(cls, name, bases, attrs)

class ExampleTestCase(TestCase):
    """Our example test case, with no methods defined"""
    __metaclass__ = DocTestMeta

输出:

test_sample (ExampleTestCase) ... OK

这被称为“参数化”。

有几个工具支持这种方法。例如:

pytest的装饰 参数化

结果代码如下所示:

from parameterized import parameterized

class TestSequence(unittest.TestCase):
    @parameterized.expand([
        ["foo", "a", "a",],
        ["bar", "a", "b"],
        ["lee", "b", "b"],
    ])
    def test_sequence(self, name, a, b):
        self.assertEqual(a,b)

这将生成测试:

test_sequence_0_foo (__main__.TestSequence) ... ok
test_sequence_1_bar (__main__.TestSequence) ... FAIL
test_sequence_2_lee (__main__.TestSequence) ... ok

======================================================================
FAIL: test_sequence_1_bar (__main__.TestSequence)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/usr/local/lib/python2.7/site-packages/parameterized/parameterized.py", line 233, in <lambda>
    standalone_func = lambda *a: func(*(a + p.args), **p.kwargs)
  File "x.py", line 12, in test_sequence
    self.assertEqual(a,b)
AssertionError: 'a' != 'b'

由于历史原因，我将保留大约2008年的原始答案):

我使用的方法是这样的:

import unittest

l = [["foo", "a", "a",], ["bar", "a", "b"], ["lee", "b", "b"]]

class TestSequense(unittest.TestCase):
    pass

def test_generator(a, b):
    def test(self):
        self.assertEqual(a,b)
    return test

if __name__ == '__main__':
    for t in l:
        test_name = 'test_%s' % t[0]
        test = test_generator(t[1], t[2])
        setattr(TestSequense, test_name, test)
    unittest.main()

你可以使用nose-ittr插件(pip install nose-ittr)。

它非常容易与现有的测试集成，并且只需要极小的更改(如果有的话)。它还支持nose多处理插件。

注意，您还可以为每个测试定制一个设置函数。

@ittr(number=[1, 2, 3, 4])
def test_even(self):
    assert_equal(self.number % 2, 0)

它也可以像内置插件attrib一样传递nosetest参数。通过这种方式，你可以只运行特定参数的特定测试:

nosetest -a number=2

这个解决方案适用于Python 2和Python 3的unittest和nose:

#!/usr/bin/env python
import unittest

def make_function(description, a, b):
    def ghost(self):
        self.assertEqual(a, b, description)
    print(description)
    ghost.__name__ = 'test_{0}'.format(description)
    return ghost


class TestsContainer(unittest.TestCase):
    pass

testsmap = {
    'foo': [1, 1],
    'bar': [1, 2],
    'baz': [5, 5]}

def generator():
    for name, params in testsmap.iteritems():
        test_func = make_function(name, params[0], params[1])
        setattr(TestsContainer, 'test_{0}'.format(name), test_func)

generator()

if __name__ == '__main__':
    unittest.main()

元编程很有趣，但它也会碍事。这里的大多数解决方案都很难:

有选择地启动测试 指向给出测试名称的代码

所以，我的第一个建议是遵循简单/显式路径(适用于任何测试运行程序):

import unittest

class TestSequence(unittest.TestCase):

    def _test_complex_property(self, a, b):
        self.assertEqual(a,b)

    def test_foo(self):
        self._test_complex_property("a", "a")
    def test_bar(self):
        self._test_complex_property("a", "b")
    def test_lee(self):
        self._test_complex_property("b", "b")

if __name__ == '__main__':
    unittest.main()

既然我们不应该重复，我的第二个建议建立在Javier的回答之上:接受基于属性的测试。假设库:

“在生成测试用例方面比我们人类更加无情地迂回” 会提供简单的计数例子吗 与任何测试运行程序一起工作 具有更多有趣的特性(统计数据、额外的测试输出……) 类TestSequence (unittest.TestCase): st.text @given (st.text () () Def test_complex_property(self, a, b): self.assertEqual (a, b)

为了测试您的特定示例，只需添加:

    @example("a", "a")
    @example("a", "b")
    @example("b", "b")

为了只运行一个特定的示例，您可以注释掉其他示例(提供的示例将首先运行)。你可能想要使用@given(st.nothing())。另一种选择是将整个区块替换为:

    @given(st.just("a"), st.just("b"))

好的，您没有不同的测试名称。但也许你只需要:

被测属性的描述性名称。 哪个输入会导致失败(伪造的例子)。

有趣的例子