Hi Graeme,
In that case I believe my patch should be disregarded. Although perhaps you
could have a look wether or not it would fit the new GUI as you designed it.
The major point was to add a synedit XML highlighter (I found the memo too
fuzzy). Also the grey background of the dialog is not how I like to see it.
It should be default color.
Darius
----- Original Message -----
From: "Graeme Geldenhuys" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2006 9:42 AM
Subject: Re: [lazarus] Patch for fpcunit
Hi Darius,
Dean based fpcUnit on JUnit not DUnit - hence the AssertXXX test
methods. Dean and I are working or improving fpcUnit's GUITestRunner
and the TextTestRunner. A little while back, I got a private patch
from Dean to add few of my requested features. My copy of fpcUnit now
has Checkbox's next to each test. Dean is refining this a bit more
and will add better popup menu items as well.
From my side, I use fpcUnit extensively and built a DUnit compatible
interface for our projects that use DUnit and fpcUnit. I also rewrote
the TestListners a few days back that generates the XML results. I
had issues with the XML generated, as they weren't valid XML and thus
couldn't parse it with XSLT. I now use the XML units that come with
FPC.
Other things I have improved is the scrolling of the treeview while
running tests (see I have 1200+ tests). Also removing the error nodes
before running tests again plus a few more...
I should be able to send these patches by the weekend. Some patches
require FPC 2.0.3 so will have to insert some IFDEF's not to break
anything.
Regards,
- Graeme -
On 6/21/06, Darius Blaszijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Here's a patch for the guitestrunner form for fpcunit. I have added a
synedit XML highlighter and done some anchoring.
Q: is fpcunit inspired on dunit or is it actually derived from some
version
of dunit? I have briefly glanced at dunit and I noticed that it has more
a
bit more functionality than fpcunit currently has. So my next question is
do
we want (need) this "more" functionalty or not? Do we want (need) fpcunit
to
be compatible with dunit?
I have also make a simple "maketestcase skeleton" app for existing
projects.
It reads the functions and properties from the implementation section
using
codetools and creates a skeleton unit, with a test case defined for each
of
the functions and units. If anyone is interested in this code I can send
it.
Perhaps it would be an idea to ship it with lazarus as a tool?
Kind regards, Darius Blaszijk
--
There's no place like 127.0.0.1
_________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe" as the Subject
archives at http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailarchives
_________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe" as the Subject
archives at http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailarchives
