On Sun, 24 Jun 2001, brian moseley wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Jun 2001, Stas Bekman wrote:
>
> > the only way to ensure identical order from run to run,
> > across different systems (and changes in file inodes
> > ordering) is to explicitly list the tests in the wanted
> > order. otherwise it's up to the inodes order under ./t.
> >
> > Since I mess with tests anyway now (see my other post
> > from a few minutes ago), do you want to add yet another
> > mode 'sort'?
>
> makes sense. that would allow me to at least use naming
> conventions to ensure run order.
ok will add 'sort'. which will presort tests before applying any other
algorithm.
should 'sort' be non-exclusive with 'rotate|repeat'? (it won't apply to
'random' of course)
but it gets hairy then: --run-tests[=[N][:][order][:][sort]] ?
I'd rather have --run-tests --test_times=N --test_order=ORDER
--[no]test_sort? Doug?
> > But, hey, look at the random mode I've just added. Why
> > would you want to ensure the same order in tests? That's
> > not the way QA works :)
>
> dependencies. if class B extends or uses class A, i want to
> run the tests for class A before those for class B.
shouldn't your tests be independent from each other? if they are why not
to put them in one test? Or have one test calling a few others. what you
are saying doesn't sound well, but you know your requirements better :)
_____________________________________________________________________
Stas Bekman JAm_pH -- Just Another mod_perl Hacker
http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide http://perl.apache.org/guide
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://apachetoday.com http://eXtropia.com/
http://singlesheaven.com http://perl.apache.org http://perlmonth.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
