On Wed, 2006-07-19 at 06:09 -0500, Timothy Brownawell wrote:
I've given the lua extension functions (monotone_*_for_lua) a LUAEXT()
macro, which does more-or-less the same thing as CMD() and AUTOMATE()
do. They can be split up into different files now, and the specific
extensions that need
On Thu, 2006-07-13 at 17:27 -0500, Timothy Brownawell wrote:
So far I have sanity dependencies reduced to ui, quick_alloc, platform,
simplestring_xform, constants, and numeric_vocab. constants is only used
for default_encoding by split_into_lines, and for log_line_sz in
sanity.cc.
sanity no
On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 01:09:19AM -0500, Timothy Brownawell wrote:
Everything seems to work now, and all the buildbots except win32 (which
has a longstanding unit_tests failure, and what looks like a
canonicalization issue in one of the new tests) are green.
Indeed. Great work!
The new
I'd like to throw out another possibility for testsuite improvement:
Kill boost::unit_test; move everything into the Lua testsuite.
This may sound completely crazy, but think about it. Wouldn't it be
nice if we didn't have to recompile the entire codebase in order to
run the test suite? The
On Thu, Jul 13, 2006 at 08:55:35AM -0700, Zack Weinberg wrote:
I'd like to throw out another possibility for testsuite improvement:
Kill boost::unit_test; move everything into the Lua testsuite.
This may sound completely crazy, but think about it. Wouldn't it be
nice if we didn't have to
Hallo,
On 7/13/06, Zack Weinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd like to throw out another possibility for testsuite improvement:
Kill boost::unit_test; move everything into the Lua testsuite.
What I've done here at work is to write all the unit test
functions as Lua CFunctions, export then
Alex Queiroz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
What I've done here at work is to write all the unit test functions
as Lua CFunctions, export then to Lua and run the unit tests from a
Lua script that also generates a report. Very handy.
Sounds to me like the costs would outweigh the benefits
Hallo,
On 7/13/06, Bruce Stephens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Easier, but still not trivial. It's surely still four or five lines
per function?
This is getting off-topic, but still... What I did was to create
some macros for the developers to allow them to write the testsuite
without any
On Thu, 2006-07-13 at 01:43 -0700, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 01:09:19AM -0500, Timothy Brownawell wrote:
The new testsuite seems to be done now, but some things aren't optimal
yet. In particular I'd like to make tester fairly independent from the
rest of monotone by
On Wed, 2006-07-05 at 23:39 -0500, Timothy Brownawell wrote:
There is minimal documentation in tester.txt and testsuite.txt now,
currently only having short descriptions of the available functions.
I've also fixed a problem where the tester couldn't set env vars
reliably, and a place where a
10 matches
Mail list logo
