John Anderson wrote:
Having written my first functional test yesterday I have some
thoughts. The biggest problem I encountered when trying to write and
debug tests is navigating all the layers:
my test <-> CATS <-> CPIA Script <-> Chandler
Fortunately I'm very familiar with Chandler, somewhat familiar with
CPIA Script and CATS is small enough to grock without much effort.
However, I suspect most developers would find all the layers daunting
and trying to debug things would only make it worse.
Agree with that.
I think it would be preferable to make the small changes necessary to
CPIA Script to make it appropriate for testing instead of adding
another layer, e.g. CATS.
Improving CPIA Script to make scripting easier is indeed a good idea. I
don't think it will replace entirely a test harness though like CATS or,
better, OAF (proposed by Mikeal). There's a lot of test functions
(batch, log, data gathering and stats) that have no place in a Chandler
level scripting language. John, I suggest you read Mikeal proposal
(http://wiki.osafoundation.org/bin/view/Projects/OpenAutomationFramework)
first. Keep in mind also that Mikeal is trying to solve a problem that
includes Chandler and Cosmo.
Similarly, I think it's preferable to modify Chandler to eliminate
some of CPIA Script.
What alternative to CPIA scripting do you propose? No scripting at all?
Another script mechanism? Leverage an existing one?
Cheers,
- Philippe
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Open Source Applications Foundation "Dev" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
