From: Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>
To: David Gilbert <david.gilbert@object-refinery.com>
Cc: Anthony Balkissoon <abalkiss@redhat.com>,
classpath@gnu.org, mauve-discuss@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: Mauve wishlist
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 22:24:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m3mzfjcugu.fsf@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4420336F.4070602@object-refinery.com>
>>>>> "David" == David Gilbert <david.gilbert@object-refinery.com> writes:
>> Another suggestion that Tom Fitzsimmons had was to change the way we
>> count the number of tests. Counting each invocation of the test()
>> method rather than each call to harness.check() has two benefits:
David> We can work around that by ensuring that all the tests run linearly
David> (no if-else branches - I've written a large number of tests this way
David> and not found it to be a limitation, but I don't know what lurks in
David> the depths of the older Mauve tests). There is still the problem that
David> an exception being thrown during a test means some checks don't get
David> run, but a new Mauve comparison report (not yet developed, although
David> I've done a little experimenting with it) could highlight those.
I've always tried to write tests the way you suggest, but the
exception problem turns out to be a real one, preventing test
stability in some cases.
One thing I like about this current proposal is that it automates test
stability -- the only failure modes possible are if a test hangs or if
the VM crashes.
As far as having more granular information -- we can still print a
message when a check() fails. A command line option to the test
harness could control this, for instance. I think we don't want to
just print a plain 'FAIL', we want some explanation; the detailed info
could go there.
Tom
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-03-21 22:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-03-17 16:27 Thomas Fitzsimmons
2006-03-17 21:06 ` David Daney
2006-03-18 8:15 ` Michael Koch
2006-03-17 22:34 ` Audrius Meskauskas
2006-03-20 10:53 ` Arnaud Vandyck
2006-03-20 16:51 ` Anthony Balkissoon
2006-03-21 16:58 ` David Gilbert
2006-03-21 22:24 ` Tom Tromey [this message]
2006-03-21 23:08 ` Bryce McKinlay
2006-03-22 11:12 ` David Gilbert
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=m3mzfjcugu.fsf@localhost.localdomain \
--to=tromey@redhat.com \
--cc=abalkiss@redhat.com \
--cc=classpath@gnu.org \
--cc=david.gilbert@object-refinery.com \
--cc=mauve-discuss@sources.redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).