Le 24/04/2013 20:08, Rick Waldron a écrit :
On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 6:14 AM, David Bruant <bruan...@gmail.com
<mailto:bruan...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Le 23/04/2013 23:47, Rick Waldron a écrit :
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 1:34 PM, David Bruant <bruan...@gmail.com
<mailto:bruan...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi,
Based on recent messages on es-discuss, I feel that both
es-discuss and apparently even TC39 meetings with notes have
left ambiguity in what people understood the TC39 agreement
was. I believe this ambiguity is due to this pretty bad
communication format called the English language (For anyone
in doubt, French is as bad; I'm afraid it's a property
inherent to natural languages :-) ).
This is wasting everyone time and energy. This generate
frustration additional to the already existing frustration
caused by standardizing __proto__ at all.
So I would like to encourage TC39 to discuss around and
create consensus around a test suite.
Do you mean something other then the one that already exists?
http://test262.ecmascript.org/#
If TC39 adds tests to this test suite *before* ES6 becomes an
official standard, use this, yes. Please writes hundreds of tests
for ES6.
For the anecdote, I've started a test suite for proxies [1] and
the exercise led to feedback [2][3], some of which were spec bugs
[4][5]. So I don't know, maybe there is some virtue to write tests
before the spec is shipped. Not for the sake of writing tests or
even the sake of getting a conformance test suite, but for the
spec of spending time carefully reviewing the drafts and catching
spec bugs early. For the sake of having a structured medium to
discuss on and not just plain-text emails with occasional code
snippets.
But I don't see TC39 adding tests. Worse, I see the same
conversations happening over and over on __proto__. Even after the
January TC39 meeting. Even with the notes, ambiguities and
misunderstanding remain.
So, until tests are added to http://test262.ecmascript.org/, I
propose using a test suite not as a conformance tool, but as a
conversation medium. This is an attempt to move the conversation
from words like "poisoned", "realm", "magic" (!) to a conversation
where there are a bunch (20, 50, 100?) of test cases where TC39
says "for all of these cases, we agree the test must pass" and
where people can have a very concrete medium to point out and say
"I agree this test must pass, but this more subtle test case must
pass too" (refining the previous test case)
The goal of the test suite I have started is not to run it. It's
for human beings to discuss around it; to read it, explain why
they disagree, correct an existing test or add one for each
disagreement. A communication medium in essence.
At this point, I believe that a test suite would be an excellent
complement to meeting notes to capture consensus.
Again, I suggest subscribing to
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/test262-discuss
I am already subscribed.
This conversation is happening right now, starting here:
https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/test262-discuss/2013-April/000169.html
This thread is about how to organize ES6 tests (folders structure, Hg
branches, etc.), not about using tests as a conversation medium as I
have described.
Are you trying to say that TC39 is committed to write lots of tests
before shipping the spec and that this thread is the first step?
And that whoever write these tests will be committed to spend a lot of
time on es-discuss+bugs.ecmascript to report spec errors and discuss
potential spec ambiguities?
David
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
