This sounds like a great idea to me.
-Darin

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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to