gryznar

I'll bump the topic. It would be great if fixtures were supported in setup_class, setup_method, teardown_class and teardown_method.

Moreover using xunit style is much simplier and much more explicit than defining it via fixtures. So support for fixtures in it is very reasonable.

> > Or, is there some technical reason why this would create a lot of additional complexity? > > Mostly this: we run the xunit tests using their own `TestCase`...

@RonnyPfannschmidt if we could treat setup_class like: ```python @classmethod @pytest.fixture(scope='class', autouse=True) def _setup_class(cls, *args): .... ``` teardown_class like: ```python @classmethod @pytest.fixture(scope='class', autouse=True) def _teardown_class(cls, *args): yield .... ``` setup_method like:...

@RonnyPfannschmidt I see, but you can agree with me for sure, that they are much more readable and obvious for end user, so maybe we can really consider upgrading /...

You may be right but for less advanced user, properly used xunit-style setup seems to be the best solution. Please consider implementing fixtues in them if it is possible.

As you can see, that's not only my personal request.

Of course I mean the pytest implementation. Inheriting over TestCase does not allow to use fixtures at all. My use case: I am writing tests in selenium. Driver instance is...

@lattner, @ematejska are you planning to adjust these identifiers across Mojo's stdlib? It will be best to make decision related to coherent naming convention as soon as possible to reduce...

Thank you for this! Python has a lot of consistency issues and sometimes looks like a patchwork. I would like Mojo to avoid such mess and keep consistency across whole...