test suite naming convention
If we constrain ourselves to the proposed options, my vote is for Option
2. The reason for this vote is because it allows us to more easily
determine what regression tests need to be run for a particular change.
If we don't constrain ourselves to the proposed options, I
as the directory and file
naming convention for these new tests.
Comments?
I like how the existing tests are organized by sections in the
standard. When working on for example vector, it's easy to run just
the container tests without having to worry about all the other tests.
If the regression
an additional option.
Option 3:
Put all regression tests in tests/regress/, using the following
naming convention:
tests/regress/section-number.stdcxx-issue-number.cpp
This option would allow us to quickly locate all regression tests, and
identify which section each regression test
an additional option.
Option 3:
Put all regression tests in tests/regress/, using the following
naming convention:
tests/regress/section-number.stdcxx-issue-number.cpp
This option would allow us to quickly locate all regression tests, and
identify which section each regression test
option.
Option 3:
Put all regression tests in tests/regress/, using the following
naming convention:
tests/regress/section-number.stdcxx-issue-number.cpp
This option would allow us to quickly locate all regression tests, and
identify which section each regression test applies to without
regression tests in tests/regress/, using the following
naming convention:
tests/regress/section-number.stdcxx-issue-number.cpp
This option would allow us to quickly locate all regression tests, and
identify which section each regression test applies to without
consulting Jira.
--Andrew Black
-Original Message-
From: Andrew Black [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2007 5:57 PM
To: stdcxx-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Re: regression test suite naming convention
If we constrain ourselves to the proposed options, my vote is
for Option 2
Farid Zaripov wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Andrew Black [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2007 5:57 PM
To: stdcxx-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Re: regression test suite naming convention
If we constrain ourselves to the proposed options, my vote
Mark Brown wrote:
[...]
I propose tests/regress/stdcxx-NNN as the directory and file
naming convention for these new tests.
Comments?
I like how the existing tests are organized by sections in the standard. When
working on for example vector, it's easy to run just the container tests
I agree with this naming convetion. And I think that it will be useful
to have a common header with these enums.
Shall we rename options (rw_opt_no_replace_...) according to this
conversion too?
Martin Sebor wrote:
Once we have a nice general naming convention worked out we can move
these names
Anton Pevtsov wrote:
I agree with this naming convetion. And I think that it will be useful
to have a common header with these enums.
Shall we rename options (rw_opt_no_replace_...) according to this
conversion too?
Yes, that's a good idea. In fact, once we have the enums in a common
header we
Here's a proposed naming convention for the id tags used in string
and (in the future) container tests. All the tags should probably
have some prefix clearly identifying them as members of the same
family (e.g., CF_ for Container Function or CM_ for Container
Member, or something short like
Martin,
I am working on the strings.cons test now and I am fiddling with the
replacement op new/delete support in the driver.
So, the naming convention calls for _rw_ for all functions in the driver
(including those with internal linkage) and rw_ for all types defined in
the driver?
Thanks
Liviu Nicoara wrote:
Martin,
I am working on the strings.cons test now and I am fiddling with the
replacement op new/delete support in the driver.
So, the naming convention calls for _rw_ for all functions in the driver
(including those with internal linkage) and rw_ for all types defined
Martin,
There are quite a few tests affected by the name changes in the
replacement op new/delete in driver:
/build/nicoara/hal/tests/stdlib/containers/deque_modifiers.cpp
/build/nicoara/hal/tests/stdlib/containers/leak.cpp
/build/nicoara/hal/tests/stdlib/containers/vector.cpp
Do you mind if I take route #1?
Martin Sebor wrote:
Liviu Nicoara wrote:
Martin,
There are quite a few tests affected by the name changes in the
replacement op new/delete in driver:
We need to minimize breakage in the Rogue Wave test suite (i.e.,
in tests that haven't yet been ported to
16 matches
Mail list logo
