I think you also need a way to override this in some instances, since there are methods (especially in views/ and the UI) for which there is no simple way to "verify" correctness of an implementation in code - e.g. a function that paints a series of bitmaps at specific locations. (Nor would we really want to invest in one, since visual designs evolve continuously over time).
-Ben On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 3:25 PM, Pam Greene <[email protected]> wrote: > We don't have very good unit test coverage (in the broad sense, including > ui_tests, test_shell_tests, etc.) for our code. We've always had a policy > that any new code had to have an associated test, but historically we've > been really bad about enforcing it. > > As a way to help contributors and reviewers remember to add tests, here's a > proposal to have gcl report when they are (or might be) missing. It's a > very rough guess now, and will probably need some refinement as we see what > it misses and where its false positives are too annoying. > > What changes might need tests? > > Any new source file (.cc, .cpp, .m, or .mm), or > Any new method added to a source or header (.h file > > A new method is identified by a flush-left non-comment line that has ( > somewhere before the next flush-left line and either ends with { or has { at > the start of the next flush-left line. > > What counts as a test? > > Any change to any code file whose name ends in test.* or tests.* > > This is very rough, but at least it shows that the contributor thought about > testing when making the patch > > What do we do if we don't find a test? > > On 'gcl change', report a warning to the user > On 'gcl upload', add a warning to the change description so the reviewer > sees it too > > Add an option to override this > > Future possibilities > > Is it worth restricting the check to only public or protected methods? > Since any "real" change ought to either fix a bug or add a feature that > should be tested, warn whenever there are no changes to any tests (including > layout tests) or a test_lists file, even when no source files or methods > were added. Alas, this is probably not feasible since we don't keep layout > tests in the same repository > Rather than adding a warning to the change description, it'd be nice to have > a separate warning in the review app, so it showed up no matter what and the > path author didn't have to override anything. But since we want the warning > in client-side 'gcl change' anyway, for now we'll keep it simple and trust > people. > > Comments and volunteers welcome. > - Pam > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Chromium Developers mailing list: [email protected] View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
