Discussion: consider merging `with` statements

[pnijhara]

Although the with statements mentioned below are written in tests, they can be merged. I am not very much sure about this but we can have a discussion on it.

1. In chapter9/chapter9_db_test.py:

29 @pytest.fixture
30 async def test_client():
31    app.dependency_overrides[get_database] = get_test_database
32    async with LifespanManager(app):
33        async with httpx.AsyncClient(app=app, base_url="http://app.io") as test_client:
34            yield test_client
35
36
37 @pytest.fixture(autouse=True, scope="module")

this can reframed as:

29 @pytest.fixture
30 async def test_client():
31    app.dependency_overrides[get_database] = get_test_database
32    async with LifespanManager(app), httpx.AsyncClient(app=app, base_url="http://app.io") as test_client:
33        yield test_client
34
35
36 @pytest.fixture(autouse=True, scope="module")

Similarly in chapter9/chapter9_app_post_test.py, chapter9/chapter9_app_test.py, chapter9/chapter9_db_test.py. There could be other collapsable with statements that could be merged that I haven't looked.

[frankie567]

Hi @pnijhara!

Thank you for raising this point! Indeed, the syntax you propose is completely equivalent and working. However, I find the former more readable: for developers discovering the code of this fixture, it's more obvious that we are first opening a context for the lifespan events, then another one for the HTTP client.

Therefore, I think we can keep it like this; it's not harmful IMO.

[pnijhara]

Yeah, I agree with you it is more readable. However, for the sake of others, I request you to keep this discussion open. Maybe someone finds this worthy.