Hi, thats a nice idea indeed. However, such auto-generated tests can only verify if the called modules can be executed and if they return 0. They can not replace tests that verify the result of the processing or correct error handling.
The next problem is how to distinguish between a module/shell-command and the generated output in the manual page? I have plenty of examples in the temporal module manual pages that provide the stdout/stderr output of the called module in the code section. Hence, it would be meaningful to mark code section in the manual page that can be used for testing purposes. Best regards Soeren 2014-11-26 16:44 GMT+01:00 Markus Neteler <[email protected]>: > Hi, > > in the recent past I added a series of examples to various manual > pages. Most of them might qualify for (basic) testing of the > respective command. > Since it is a bit time consuming to write these standard tests > manually, would there be a chance to develop a test case generator > e.g. driven by a template? > > Markus > _______________________________________________ > grass-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev _______________________________________________ grass-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev
