2009/8/5 Robert Goldman <rpgold...@sift.info>:
>> I would propose that as a matter of good style implementations of
>> TEST-OP should signal an error is tests do not pass. It is the
>> simplest way to make sure the result is not misinterpreted...
> I suppose, but typically a regression test suite should attempt to run
> ALL of its tests, collecting a set of failing tests, and then returning
> that information. And demanding interactive attention ("I'm going to
> throw you into the debugger if I fail") may also be undesirable in
> practice. I suppose handler-case would be enough for that, but I'm
> still uncomfortable with the idea.
My rationale for suggesting this was that there are two mental modes
for running tests: as a user ("Do I have version that seems to be
working?") and as a developer ("What did I break now?").
I would expect TEST-SYSTEM to be used mostly by the end users of ASDF
systems, whereas presumably developers run their own test-suites more
directly -- I'm assuming that the typical TEST-OP definition would
look like this:
(defmethod perform ((op test-op) (sys (eql (find-system :my-system))))
(foo-unit:run-tests :my-system-tests :on-failure :error))
and developers of MY-SYSTEM would normally use RUN-TESTS directly,
taking advantage of whatever reporting and debugging features the
test-suite provides.
Cheers,
-- Nikodemus
_______________________________________________
asdf-devel mailing list
asdf-devel@common-lisp.net
http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/asdf-devel
