On Sun, Sep 02, 2001 at 05:05:43PM +0300, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote: > I think the wholesale renaming of t/op/misc as t/run/kill_perl is > really wrong. > > (I think you are reading too much into the leading comments, and other > people have been reading too little into them.) > > t/op/misc has NOT consistently been the place for core-dumping tests; > it has some yes, but not all, and some of its tests are _not_ > core-dumping, they are, ta-dah, misc, tests that over the years have > had no other appropriate place.
Here's the Master Plan for t/op/misc.t, and I think it'll jive with what you're thinking, just in a different order. First order of business was to figure out what the hell misc.t does, clean it up and explain it a little better. That's done. Then we want to STOP people from using t/op/misc.t as a dumping ground. Thus, the rename and better instructions. It's obviously *not* intended for miscellaneous tests, it's for tests that kill the interpretor. The bad name as lead to it being used as a dumping ground. With the dumping stopped, THEN we can start doing the archeological digging necessary to figure out what in misc.t was put in there because it was a killer and what's in there just because they didn't know where else it should go. This might just involve running the test against older versions of Perl and see what blows up, or it might involve digging back through the p5p archives. Most of what we dig out of it should be able to fit into existing tests. If we truly still have a need for t/op/misc.t, it'll be reinstated. So I want to rename it first, then pull it apart to avoid people continuing to dump "miscellaneous" tests in while we're trying to get rid of them. Rather than pull it apart then rename it. It's not a huge deal, just so long as it eventually gets pulled apart and renamed, whatever the order. > Also, I do not see any particular advantage in having a separate > test script *just* for core-dumping tests: the test harnesses > (TEST and harness) should handle core dumps (as well as they can) > in any test script. Problems with that: Some of these tests require *very specific* conditions and combinations to cause a failure. Simply sticking them into an eval STRING isn't going to trigger it (a lot of them are syntax errors). You've got to run it as a seperate program. Thus all the special life-support in misc.t. also... If you try to lump these all together into one test, say 40 of them, if #8 fails, the test explodes and you don't anything about 9 through 40. The alternative is to have a seperate test script for each test with it's own life support. Finally, since somebody's already done the hard work of setting up a test that can safely handle core-dumping tests in a cross-platform manner, why throw it out? -- Michael G. Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.pobox.com/~schwern/ Perl6 Quality Assurance <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Kwalitee Is Job One <Skrewtape> I've heard that semen tastes different depending on diet. Is that true? <Skrewtape> Hello? <Schwern> Skrewtape: Hang on, I'm conducting research.
