You are here: Home ‣ Dive Into Python 3 ‣
Difficulty level: ♦♦♢♢♢
❝ Certitude is not the test of certainty. We have been cocksure of many things that were not so. ❞
— Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.
Kids today. So spoiled by these fast computers and fancy “dynamic” languages. Write first, ship second, debug third (if ever). In my day, we had discipline. Discipline, I say! We had to write programs by hand, on paper, and feed them to the computer on punchcards. And we liked it!
In this chapter, you’re going to write and debug a set of utility functions to convert to and from Roman numerals. You saw the mechanics of constructing and validating Roman numerals in “Case study: roman numerals”. Now step back and consider what it would take to expand that into a two-way utility.
The rules for Roman numerals lead to a number of interesting observations:
1
through 3999
. The Romans did have several ways of expressing larger numbers, for instance by having a bar over a numeral to represent that its normal value should be multiplied by 1000
. For the purposes of this chapter, let’s stipulate that Roman numerals go from 1
to 3999
.
Let’s start mapping out what a roman.py
module should do. It will have two main functions, to_roman()
and from_roman()
. The to_roman()
function should take an integer from 1
to 3999
and return the Roman numeral representation as a string…
Stop right there. Now let’s do something a little unexpected: write a test case that checks whether the to_roman()
function does what you want it to. You read that right: you’re going to write code that tests code that you haven’t written yet.
This is called test-driven development, or TDD. The set of two conversion functions — to_roman()
, and later from_roman()
— can be written and tested as a unit, separate from any larger program that imports them. Python has a framework for unit testing, the appropriately-named unittest
module.
Unit testing is an important part of an overall testing-centric development strategy. If you write unit tests, it is important to write them early and to keep them updated as code and requirements change. Many people advocate writing tests before they write the code they’re testing, and that’s the style I’m going to demonstrate in this chapter. But unit tests are beneficial no matter when you write them.
⁂
A test case answers a single question about the code it is testing. A test case should be able to...
Given that, let’s build a test case for the first requirement:
to_roman()
function should return the Roman numeral representation for all integers 1
to 3999
.
It is not immediately obvious how this code does… well, anything. It defines a class which has no __init__()
method. The class does have another method, but it is never called. The entire script has a __main__
block, but it doesn’t reference the class or its method. But it does do something, I promise.
import roman1
import unittest
class KnownValues(unittest.TestCase): ①
known_values = ( (1, 'I'),
(2, 'II'),
(3, 'III'),
(4, 'IV'),
(5, 'V'),
(6, 'VI'),
(7, 'VII'),
(8, 'VIII'),
(9, 'IX'),
(10, 'X'),
(50, 'L'),
(100, 'C'),
(500, 'D'),
(1000, 'M'),
(31, 'XXXI'),
(148, 'CXLVIII'),
(294, 'CCXCIV'),
(312, 'CCCXII'),
(421, 'CDXXI'),
(528, 'DXXVIII'),
(621, 'DCXXI'),
(782, 'DCCLXXXII'),
(870, 'DCCCLXX'),
(941, 'CMXLI'),
(1043, 'MXLIII'),
(1110, 'MCX'),
(1226, 'MCCXXVI'),
(1301, 'MCCCI'),
(1485, 'MCDLXXXV'),
(1509, 'MDIX'),
(1607, 'MDCVII'),
(1754, 'MDCCLIV'),
(1832, 'MDCCCXXXII'),
(1993, 'MCMXCIII'),
(2074, 'MMLXXIV'),
(2152, 'MMCLII'),
(2212, 'MMCCXII'),
(2343, 'MMCCCXLIII'),
(2499, 'MMCDXCIX'),
(2574, 'MMDLXXIV'),
(2646, 'MMDCXLVI'),
(2723, 'MMDCCXXIII'),
(2892, 'MMDCCCXCII'),
(2975, 'MMCMLXXV'),
(3051, 'MMMLI'),
(3185, 'MMMCLXXXV'),
(3250, 'MMMCCL'),
(3313, 'MMMCCCXIII'),
(3408, 'MMMCDVIII'),
(3501, 'MMMDI'),
(3610, 'MMMDCX'),
(3743, 'MMMDCCXLIII'),
(3844, 'MMMDCCCXLIV'),
(3888, 'MMMDCCCLXXXVIII'),
(3940, 'MMMCMXL'),
(3999, 'MMMCMXCIX')) ②
def test_to_roman_known_values(self): ③
'''to_roman should give known result with known input'''
for integer, numeral in self.known_values:
result = roman1.to_roman(integer) ④
self.assertEqual(numeral, result) ⑤
if __name__ == '__main__':
unittest.main()
TestCase
class of the unittest
module. This class provides many useful methods which you can use in your test case to test specific conditions.
test
. If a test method exits normally without raising an exception, the test is considered passed; if the method raises an exception, the test is considered failed.
to_roman()
function. (Well, the function hasn’t been written yet, but once it is, this is the line that will call it.) Notice that you have now defined the API for the to_roman()
function: it must take an integer (the number to convert) and return a string (the Roman numeral representation). If the API is different than that, this test is considered failed. Also notice that you are not trapping any exceptions when you call to_roman()
. This is intentional. to_roman()
shouldn’t raise an exception when you call it with valid input, and these input values are all valid. If to_roman()
raises an exception, this test is considered failed.
to_roman()
function was defined correctly, called correctly, completed successfully, and returned a value, the last step is to check whether it returned the right value. This is a common question, and the TestCase
class provides a method, assertEqual
, to check whether two values are equal. If the result returned from to_roman()
(result) does not match the known value you were expecting (numeral), assertEqual
will raise an exception and the test will fail. If the two values are equal, assertEqual
will do nothing. If every value returned from to_roman()
matches the known value you expect, assertEqual
never raises an exception, so test_to_roman_known_values
eventually exits normally, which means to_roman()
has passed this test.
Once you have a test case, you can start coding the to_roman()
function. First, you should stub it out as an empty function and make sure the tests fail. If the tests succeed before you’ve written any code, your tests aren’t testing your code at all! Unit testing is a dance: tests lead, code follows. Write a test that fails, then code until it passes.
# roman1.py
def to_roman(n):
'''convert integer to Roman numeral'''
pass ①
to_roman()
function, but you don’t want to code it yet. (Your test needs to fail first.) To stub it out, use the Python reserved word pass
, which does precisely nothing.
Execute romantest1.py
on the command line to run the test. If you call it with the -v
command-line option, it will give more verbose output so you can see exactly what’s going on as each test case runs. With any luck, your output should look like this:
you@localhost:~/diveintopython3/examples$ python3 romantest1.py -v test_to_roman_known_values (__main__.KnownValues) ① to_roman should give known result with known input ... FAIL ② ====================================================================== FAIL: to_roman should give known result with known input ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Traceback (most recent call last): File "romantest1.py", line 73, in test_to_roman_known_values self.assertEqual(numeral, result) AssertionError: 'I' != None ③ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Ran 1 test in 0.016s ④ FAILED (failures=1) ⑤
unittest.main()
, which runs each test case. Each test case is a method within a class in romantest.py
. There is no required organization of these test classes; they can each contain a single test method, or you can have one class that contains multiple test methods. The only requirement is that each test class must inherit from unittest.TestCase
.
unittest
module will print out the docstring
of the method and whether that test passed or failed. As expected, this test case fails.
unittest
displays the trace information showing exactly what happened. In this case, the call to assertEqual()
raised an AssertionError
because it was expecting to_roman(1)
to return 'I'
, but it didn’t. (Since there was no explicit return statement, the function returned None
, the Python null value.)
unittest
displays a summary of how many tests were performed and how long it took.
unittest
distinguishes between failures and errors. A failure is a call to an assertXYZ
method, like assertEqual
or assertRaises
, that fails because the asserted condition is not true or the expected exception was not raised. An error is any other sort of exception raised in the code you’re testing or the unit test case itself.
Now, finally, you can write the to_roman()
function.
roman_numeral_map = (('M', 1000),
('CM', 900),
('D', 500),
('CD', 400),
('C', 100),
('XC', 90),
('L', 50),
('XL', 40),
('X', 10),
('IX', 9),
('V', 5),
('IV', 4),
('I', 1)) ①
def to_roman(n):
'''convert integer to Roman numeral'''
result = ''
for numeral, integer in roman_numeral_map:
while n >= integer: ②
result += numeral
n -= integer
return result
M
all the way down to I
); the value of each Roman numeral. Each inner tuple is a pair of (numeral, value)
. It’s not just single-character Roman numerals; it also defines two-character pairs like CM
(“one hundred less than one thousand”). This makes the to_roman()
function code simpler.
If you’re still not clear how the to_roman()
function works, add a print()
call to the end of the while
loop:
while n >= integer:
result += numeral
n -= integer
print('subtracting {0} from input, adding {1} to output'.format(integer, numeral))
With the debug print()
statements, the output looks like this:
>>> import roman1 >>> roman1.to_roman(1424) subtracting 1000 from input, adding M to output subtracting 400 from input, adding CD to output subtracting 10 from input, adding X to output subtracting 10 from input, adding X to output subtracting 4 from input, adding IV to output 'MCDXXIV'
So the to_roman()
function appears to work, at least in this manual spot check. But will it pass the test case you wrote?
you@localhost:~/diveintopython3/examples$ python3 romantest1.py -v
test_to_roman_known_values (__main__.KnownValues)
to_roman should give known result with known input ... ok ①
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ran 1 test in 0.016s
OK
to_roman()
function passes the “known values” test case. It’s not comprehensive, but it does put the function through its paces with a variety of inputs, including inputs that produce every single-character Roman numeral, the largest possible input (3999
), and the input that produces the longest possible Roman numeral (3888
). At this point, you can be reasonably confident that the function works for any good input value you could throw at it.
“Good” input? Hmm. What about bad input?
⁂
It is not enough to test that functions succeed when given good input; you must also test that they fail when given bad input. And not just any sort of failure; they must fail in the way you expect.
>>> import roman1
>>> roman1.to_roman(4000)
'MMMM'
>>> roman1.to_roman(5000)
'MMMMM'
>>> roman1.to_roman(9000) ①
'MMMMMMMMM'
The question to ask yourself is, “How can I express this as a testable requirement?” How’s this for starters:
The
to_roman()
function should raise anOutOfRangeError
when given an integer greater than3999
.
What would that test look like?
class ToRomanBadInput(unittest.TestCase): ①
def test_too_large(self): ②
'''to_roman should fail with large input'''
self.assertRaises(roman2.OutOfRangeError, roman2.to_roman, 4000) ③
unittest.TestCase
. You can have more than one test per class (as you’ll see later in this chapter), but I chose to create a new class here because this test is something different than the last one. We’ll keep all the good input tests together in one class, and all the bad input tests together in another.
test
.
unittest.TestCase
class provides the assertRaises
method, which takes the following arguments: the exception you’re expecting, the function you’re testing, and the arguments you’re passing to that function. (If the function you’re testing takes more than one argument, pass them all to assertRaises
, in order, and it will pass them right along to the function you’re testing.)
Pay close attention to this last line of code. Instead of calling to_roman()
directly and manually checking that it raises a particular exception (by wrapping it in a try...except
block), the assertRaises
method has encapsulated all of that for us. All you do is tell it what exception you’re expecting (roman2.OutOfRangeError
), the function (to_roman()
), and the function’s arguments (4000
). The assertRaises
method takes care of calling to_roman()
and checking that it raises roman2.OutOfRangeError
.
Also note that you’re passing the to_roman()
function itself as an argument; you’re not calling it, and you’re not passing the name of it as a string. Have I mentioned recently how handy it is that everything in Python is an object?
So what happens when you run the test suite with this new test?
you@localhost:~/diveintopython3/examples$ python3 romantest2.py -v test_to_roman_known_values (__main__.KnownValues) to_roman should give known result with known input ... ok test_too_large (__main__.ToRomanBadInput) to_roman should fail with large input ... ERROR ① ====================================================================== ERROR: to_roman should fail with large input ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Traceback (most recent call last): File "romantest2.py", line 78, in test_too_large self.assertRaises(roman2.OutOfRangeError, roman2.to_roman, 4000) AttributeError: 'module' object has no attribute 'OutOfRangeError' ② ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Ran 2 tests in 0.000s FAILED (errors=1)
OutOfRangeError
. Remember, you passed this exception to the assertRaises()
method, because it’s the exception you want the function to raise given an out-of-range input. But the exception doesn’t exist, so the call to the assertRaises()
method failed. It never got a chance to test the to_roman()
function; it didn’t get that far.
To solve this problem, you need to define the OutOfRangeError
exception in roman2.py
.
class OutOfRangeError(ValueError): ①
pass ②
ValueError
exception. This is not strictly necessary (it could just inherit from the base Exception
class), but it feels right.
pass
does precisely nothing, but it’s a line of Python code, so that makes it a class.
Now run the test suite again.
you@localhost:~/diveintopython3/examples$ python3 romantest2.py -v test_to_roman_known_values (__main__.KnownValues) to_roman should give known result with known input ... ok test_too_large (__main__.ToRomanBadInput) to_roman should fail with large input ... FAIL ① ====================================================================== FAIL: to_roman should fail with large input ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Traceback (most recent call last): File "romantest2.py", line 78, in test_too_large self.assertRaises(roman2.OutOfRangeError, roman2.to_roman, 4000) AssertionError: OutOfRangeError not raised by to_roman ② ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Ran 2 tests in 0.016s FAILED (failures=1)
assertRaises()
method succeeded this time, and the unit test framework actually tested the to_roman()
function.
to_roman()
function isn’t raising the OutOfRangeError
exception you just defined, because you haven’t told it to do that yet. That’s excellent news! It means this is a valid test case — it fails before you write the code to make it pass.
Now you can write the code to make this test pass.
def to_roman(n):
'''convert integer to Roman numeral'''
if n > 3999:
raise OutOfRangeError('number out of range (must be less than 4000)') ①
result = ''
for numeral, integer in roman_numeral_map:
while n >= integer:
result += numeral
n -= integer
return result
3999
, raise an OutOfRangeError
exception. The unit test does not check the human-readable string that accompanies the exception, although you could write another test that did check it (but watch out for internationalization issues for strings that vary by the user’s language or environment).
Does this make the test pass? Let’s find out.
you@localhost:~/diveintopython3/examples$ python3 romantest2.py -v
test_to_roman_known_values (__main__.KnownValues)
to_roman should give known result with known input ... ok
test_too_large (__main__.ToRomanBadInput)
to_roman should fail with large input ... ok ①
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ran 2 tests in 0.000s
OK
⁂
Along with testing numbers that are too large, you need to test numbers that are too small. As we noted in our functional requirements, Roman numerals cannot express 0 or negative numbers.
>>> import roman2 >>> roman2.to_roman(0) '' >>> roman2.to_roman(-1) ''
Well that’s not good. Let’s add tests for each of these conditions.
class ToRomanBadInput(unittest.TestCase):
def test_too_large(self):
'''to_roman should fail with large input'''
self.assertRaises(roman3.OutOfRangeError, roman3.to_roman, 4000) ①
def test_zero(self):
'''to_roman should fail with 0 input'''
self.assertRaises(roman3.OutOfRangeError, roman3.to_roman, 0) ②
def test_negative(self):
'''to_roman should fail with negative input'''
self.assertRaises(roman3.OutOfRangeError, roman3.to_roman, -1) ③
test_too_large()
method has not changed since the previous step. I’m including it here to show where the new code fits.
test_zero()
method. Like the test_too_large()
method, it tells the assertRaises()
method defined in unittest.TestCase
to call our to_roman()
function with a parameter of 0, and check that it raises the appropriate exception, OutOfRangeError
.
test_negative()
method is almost identical, except it passes -1
to the to_roman()
function. If either of these new tests does not raise an OutOfRangeError
(either because the function returns an actual value, or because it raises some other exception), the test is considered failed.
Now check that the tests fail:
you@localhost:~/diveintopython3/examples$ python3 romantest3.py -v test_to_roman_known_values (__main__.KnownValues) to_roman should give known result with known input ... ok test_negative (__main__.ToRomanBadInput) to_roman should fail with negative input ... FAIL test_too_large (__main__.ToRomanBadInput) to_roman should fail with large input ... ok test_zero (__main__.ToRomanBadInput) to_roman should fail with 0 input ... FAIL ====================================================================== FAIL: to_roman should fail with negative input ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Traceback (most recent call last): File "romantest3.py", line 86, in test_negative self.assertRaises(roman3.OutOfRangeError, roman3.to_roman, -1) AssertionError: OutOfRangeError not raised by to_roman ====================================================================== FAIL: to_roman should fail with 0 input ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Traceback (most recent call last): File "romantest3.py", line 82, in test_zero self.assertRaises(roman3.OutOfRangeError, roman3.to_roman, 0) AssertionError: OutOfRangeError not raised by to_roman ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Ran 4 tests in 0.000s FAILED (failures=2)
Excellent. Both tests failed, as expected. Now let’s switch over to the code and see what we can do to make them pass.
def to_roman(n):
'''convert integer to Roman numeral'''
if not (0 < n < 4000): ①
raise OutOfRangeError('number out of range (must be 1..3999)') ②
result = ''
for numeral, integer in roman_numeral_map:
while n >= integer:
result += numeral
n -= integer
return result
if not ((0 < n) and (n < 4000))
, but it’s much easier to read. This one line of code should catch inputs that are too large, negative, or zero.
unittest
framework won’t care, but it’ll make it difficult to do manual debugging if your code is throwing incorrectly-described exceptions.
I could show you a whole series of unrelated examples to show that the multiple-comparisons-at-once shortcut works, but instead I’ll just run the unit tests and prove it.
you@localhost:~/diveintopython3/examples$ python3 romantest3.py -v test_to_roman_known_values (__main__.KnownValues) to_roman should give known result with known input ... ok test_negative (__main__.ToRomanBadInput) to_roman should fail with negative input ... ok test_too_large (__main__.ToRomanBadInput) to_roman should fail with large input ... ok test_zero (__main__.ToRomanBadInput) to_roman should fail with 0 input ... ok ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Ran 4 tests in 0.016s OK
⁂
There was one more functional requirement for converting numbers to Roman numerals: dealing with non-integers.
>>> import roman3 >>> roman3.to_roman(0.5) ① '' >>> roman3.to_roman(1.0) ② 'I'
Testing for non-integers is not difficult. First, define a NotIntegerError
exception.
# roman4.py
class OutOfRangeError(ValueError): pass
class NotIntegerError(ValueError): pass
Next, write a test case that checks for the NotIntegerError
exception.
class ToRomanBadInput(unittest.TestCase):
.
.
.
def test_non_integer(self):
'''to_roman should fail with non-integer input'''
self.assertRaises(roman4.NotIntegerError, roman4.to_roman, 0.5)
Now check that the test fails properly.
you@localhost:~/diveintopython3/examples$ python3 romantest4.py -v test_to_roman_known_values (__main__.KnownValues) to_roman should give known result with known input ... ok test_negative (__main__.ToRomanBadInput) to_roman should fail with negative input ... ok test_non_integer (__main__.ToRomanBadInput) to_roman should fail with non-integer input ... FAIL test_too_large (__main__.ToRomanBadInput) to_roman should fail with large input ... ok test_zero (__main__.ToRomanBadInput) to_roman should fail with 0 input ... ok ====================================================================== FAIL: to_roman should fail with non-integer input ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Traceback (most recent call last): File "romantest4.py", line 90, in test_non_integer self.assertRaises(roman4.NotIntegerError, roman4.to_roman, 0.5) AssertionError: NotIntegerError not raised by to_roman ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Ran 5 tests in 0.000s FAILED (failures=1)
Write the code that makes the test pass.
def to_roman(n):
'''convert integer to Roman numeral'''
if not (0 < n < 4000):
raise OutOfRangeError('number out of range (must be 1..3999)')
if not isinstance(n, int): ①
raise NotIntegerError('non-integers can not be converted') ②
result = ''
for numeral, integer in roman_numeral_map:
while n >= integer:
result += numeral
n -= integer
return result
isinstance()
function tests whether a variable is a particular type (or, technically, any descendant type).
int
, raise our newly minted NotIntegerError
exception.
Finally, check that the code does indeed make the test pass.
you@localhost:~/diveintopython3/examples$ python3 romantest4.py -v test_to_roman_known_values (__main__.KnownValues) to_roman should give known result with known input ... ok test_negative (__main__.ToRomanBadInput) to_roman should fail with negative input ... ok test_non_integer (__main__.ToRomanBadInput) to_roman should fail with non-integer input ... ok test_too_large (__main__.ToRomanBadInput) to_roman should fail with large input ... ok test_zero (__main__.ToRomanBadInput) to_roman should fail with 0 input ... ok ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Ran 5 tests in 0.000s OK
The to_roman()
function passes all of its tests, and I can’t think of any more tests, so it’s time to move on to from_roman()
.
⁂
Converting a string from a Roman numeral to an integer sounds more difficult than converting an integer to a Roman numeral. Certainly there is the issue of validation. It’s easy to check if an integer is greater than 0, but a bit harder to check whether a string is a valid Roman numeral. But we already constructed a regular expression to check for Roman numerals, so that part is done.
That leaves the problem of converting the string itself. As we’ll see in a minute, thanks to the rich data structure we defined to map individual Roman numerals to integer values, the nitty-gritty of the from_roman()
function is as straightforward as the to_roman()
function.
But first, the tests. We’ll need a “known values” test to spot-check for accuracy. Our test suite already contains a mapping of known values; let’s reuse that.
def test_from_roman_known_values(self):
'''from_roman should give known result with known input'''
for integer, numeral in self.known_values:
result = roman5.from_roman(numeral)
self.assertEqual(integer, result)
There’s a pleasing symmetry here. The to_roman()
and from_roman()
functions are inverses of each other. The first converts integers to specially-formatted strings, the second converts specially-formated strings to integers. In theory, we should be able to “round-trip” a number by passing to the to_roman()
function to get a string, then passing that string to the from_roman()
function to get an integer, and end up with the same number.
n = from_roman(to_roman(n)) for all values of n
In this case, “all values” means any number between 1..3999
, since that is the valid range of inputs to the to_roman()
function. We can express this symmetry in a test case that runs through all the values 1..3999
, calls to_roman()
, calls from_roman()
, and checks that the output is the same as the original input.
class RoundtripCheck(unittest.TestCase):
def test_roundtrip(self):
'''from_roman(to_roman(n))==n for all n'''
for integer in range(1, 4000):
numeral = roman5.to_roman(integer)
result = roman5.from_roman(numeral)
self.assertEqual(integer, result)
These new tests won’t even fail yet. We haven’t defined a from_roman()
function at all, so they’ll just raise errors.
you@localhost:~/diveintopython3/examples$ python3 romantest5.py E.E.... ====================================================================== ERROR: test_from_roman_known_values (__main__.KnownValues) from_roman should give known result with known input ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Traceback (most recent call last): File "romantest5.py", line 78, in test_from_roman_known_values result = roman5.from_roman(numeral) AttributeError: 'module' object has no attribute 'from_roman' ====================================================================== ERROR: test_roundtrip (__main__.RoundtripCheck) from_roman(to_roman(n))==n for all n ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Traceback (most recent call last): File "romantest5.py", line 103, in test_roundtrip result = roman5.from_roman(numeral) AttributeError: 'module' object has no attribute 'from_roman' ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Ran 7 tests in 0.019s FAILED (errors=2)
A quick stub function will solve that problem.
# roman5.py
def from_roman(s):
'''convert Roman numeral to integer'''
(Hey, did you notice that? I defined a function with nothing but a docstring. That’s legal Python. In fact, some programmers swear by it. “Don’t stub; document!”)
Now the test cases will actually fail.
you@localhost:~/diveintopython3/examples$ python3 romantest5.py F.F.... ====================================================================== FAIL: test_from_roman_known_values (__main__.KnownValues) from_roman should give known result with known input ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Traceback (most recent call last): File "romantest5.py", line 79, in test_from_roman_known_values self.assertEqual(integer, result) AssertionError: 1 != None ====================================================================== FAIL: test_roundtrip (__main__.RoundtripCheck) from_roman(to_roman(n))==n for all n ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Traceback (most recent call last): File "romantest5.py", line 104, in test_roundtrip self.assertEqual(integer, result) AssertionError: 1 != None ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Ran 7 tests in 0.002s FAILED (failures=2)
Now it’s time to write the from_roman()
function.
def from_roman(s):
"""convert Roman numeral to integer"""
result = 0
index = 0
for numeral, integer in roman_numeral_map:
while s[index:index+len(numeral)] == numeral: ①
result += integer
index += len(numeral)
return result
to_roman()
function. You iterate through your Roman numeral data structure (a tuple of tuples), but instead of matching the highest integer values as often as possible, you match the “highest” Roman numeral character strings as often as possible.
If you're not clear how from_roman()
works, add a print
statement to the end of the while
loop:
def from_roman(s):
"""convert Roman numeral to integer"""
result = 0
index = 0
for numeral, integer in roman_numeral_map:
while s[index:index+len(numeral)] == numeral:
result += integer
index += len(numeral)
print('found', numeral, 'of length', len(numeral), ', adding', integer)
>>> import roman5 >>> roman5.from_roman('MCMLXXII') found M of length 1, adding 1000 found CM of length 2, adding 900 found L of length 1, adding 50 found X of length 1, adding 10 found X of length 1, adding 10 found I of length 1, adding 1 found I of length 1, adding 1 1972
Time to re-run the tests.
you@localhost:~/diveintopython3/examples$ python3 romantest5.py ....... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Ran 7 tests in 0.060s OK
Two pieces of exciting news here. The first is that the from_roman()
function works for good input, at least for all the known values. The second is that the “round trip” test also passed. Combined with the known values tests, you can be reasonably sure that both the to_roman()
and from_roman()
functions work properly for all possible good values. (This is not guaranteed; it is theoretically possible that to_roman()
has a bug that produces the wrong Roman numeral for some particular set of inputs, and that from_roman()
has a reciprocal bug that produces the same wrong integer values for exactly that set of Roman numerals that to_roman()
generated incorrectly. Depending on your application and your requirements, this possibility may bother you; if so, write more comprehensive test cases until it doesn't bother you.)
⁂
Now that the from_roman()
function works properly with good input, it's time to fit in the last piece of the puzzle: making it work properly with bad input. That means finding a way to look at a string and determine if it's a valid Roman numeral. This is inherently more difficult than validating numeric input in the to_roman()
function, but you have a powerful tool at your disposal: regular expressions. (If you’re not familiar with regular expressions, now would be a good time to read the regular expressions chapter.)
As you saw in Case Study: Roman Numerals, there are several simple rules for constructing a Roman numeral, using the letters M
, D
, C
, L
, X
, V
, and I
. Let's review the rules:
I
is 1
, II
is 2
, and III
is 3
. VI
is 6
(literally, “5
and 1
”), VII
is 7
, and VIII
is 8
.
I
, X
, C
, and M
) can be repeated up to three times. At 4
, you need to subtract from the next highest fives character. You can't represent 4
as IIII
; instead, it is represented as IV
(“1
less than 5
”). 40
is written as XL
(“10
less than 50
”), 41
as XLI
, 42
as XLII
, 43
as XLIII
, and then 44
as XLIV
(“10
less than 50
, then 1
less than 5
”).
9
, you need to subtract from the next highest tens character: 8
is VIII
, but 9
is IX
(“1
less than 10
”), not VIIII
(since the I
character can not be repeated four times). 90
is XC
, 900
is CM
.
10
is always represented as X
, never as VV
. 100
is always C
, never LL
.
DC
is 600
; CD
is a completely different number (400
, “100
less than 500
”). CI
is 101
; IC
is not even a valid Roman numeral (because you can't subtract 1
directly from 100
; you would need to write it as XCIX
, “10
less than 100
, then 1
less than 10
”).
Thus, one useful test would be to ensure that the from_roman()
function should fail when you pass it a string with too many repeated numerals. How many is “too many” depends on the numeral.
class FromRomanBadInput(unittest.TestCase):
def test_too_many_repeated_numerals(self):
'''from_roman should fail with too many repeated numerals'''
for s in ('MMMM', 'DD', 'CCCC', 'LL', 'XXXX', 'VV', 'IIII'):
self.assertRaises(roman6.InvalidRomanNumeralError, roman6.from_roman, s)
Another useful test would be to check that certain patterns aren’t repeated. For example, IX
is 9
, but IXIX
is never valid.
def test_repeated_pairs(self):
'''from_roman should fail with repeated pairs of numerals'''
for s in ('CMCM', 'CDCD', 'XCXC', 'XLXL', 'IXIX', 'IVIV'):
self.assertRaises(roman6.InvalidRomanNumeralError, roman6.from_roman, s)
A third test could check that numerals appear in the correct order, from highest to lowest value. For example, CL
is 150
, but LC
is never valid, because the numeral for 50
can never come before the numeral for 100
. This test includes a randomly chosen set of invalid antecedents: I
before M
, V
before X
, and so on.
def test_malformed_antecedents(self):
'''from_roman should fail with malformed antecedents'''
for s in ('IIMXCC', 'VX', 'DCM', 'CMM', 'IXIV',
'MCMC', 'XCX', 'IVI', 'LM', 'LD', 'LC'):
self.assertRaises(roman6.InvalidRomanNumeralError, roman6.from_roman, s)
Each of these tests relies the from_roman()
function raising a new exception, InvalidRomanNumeralError
, which we haven’t defined yet.
# roman6.py
class InvalidRomanNumeralError(ValueError): pass
All three of these tests should fail, since the from_roman()
function doesn’t currently have any validity checking. (If they don’t fail now, then what the heck are they testing?)
you@localhost:~/diveintopython3/examples$ python3 romantest6.py FFF....... ====================================================================== FAIL: test_malformed_antecedents (__main__.FromRomanBadInput) from_roman should fail with malformed antecedents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Traceback (most recent call last): File "romantest6.py", line 113, in test_malformed_antecedents self.assertRaises(roman6.InvalidRomanNumeralError, roman6.from_roman, s) AssertionError: InvalidRomanNumeralError not raised by from_roman ====================================================================== FAIL: test_repeated_pairs (__main__.FromRomanBadInput) from_roman should fail with repeated pairs of numerals ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Traceback (most recent call last): File "romantest6.py", line 107, in test_repeated_pairs self.assertRaises(roman6.InvalidRomanNumeralError, roman6.from_roman, s) AssertionError: InvalidRomanNumeralError not raised by from_roman ====================================================================== FAIL: test_too_many_repeated_numerals (__main__.FromRomanBadInput) from_roman should fail with too many repeated numerals ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Traceback (most recent call last): File "romantest6.py", line 102, in test_too_many_repeated_numerals self.assertRaises(roman6.InvalidRomanNumeralError, roman6.from_roman, s) AssertionError: InvalidRomanNumeralError not raised by from_roman ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Ran 10 tests in 0.058s FAILED (failures=3)
Good deal. Now, all we need to do is add the regular expression to test for valid Roman numerals into the from_roman()
function.
roman_numeral_pattern = re.compile('''
^ # beginning of string
M{0,3} # thousands - 0 to 3 Ms
(CM|CD|D?C{0,3}) # hundreds - 900 (CM), 400 (CD), 0-300 (0 to 3 Cs),
# or 500-800 (D, followed by 0 to 3 Cs)
(XC|XL|L?X{0,3}) # tens - 90 (XC), 40 (XL), 0-30 (0 to 3 Xs),
# or 50-80 (L, followed by 0 to 3 Xs)
(IX|IV|V?I{0,3}) # ones - 9 (IX), 4 (IV), 0-3 (0 to 3 Is),
# or 5-8 (V, followed by 0 to 3 Is)
$ # end of string
''', re.VERBOSE)
def from_roman(s):
'''convert Roman numeral to integer'''
if not roman_numeral_pattern.search(s):
raise InvalidRomanNumeralError('Invalid Roman numeral: {0}'.format(s))
result = 0
index = 0
for numeral, integer in roman_numeral_map:
while s[index : index + len(numeral)] == numeral:
result += integer
index += len(numeral)
return result
And re-run the tests…
you@localhost:~/diveintopython3/examples$ python3 romantest7.py .......... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Ran 10 tests in 0.066s OK
And the anticlimax award of the year goes to… the word “OK
”, which is printed by the unittest
module when all the tests pass.
© 2001–10 Mark Pilgrim