On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 7:57 AM, Ville M. Vainio<[email protected]> wrote:
> verify_subtree_at_position would have checked the current tree against > the one stored in leoTestResults, and raised exception (and failing > the test case) if there was a mismatch (gnx's in objtree ingored, of > course). So, once you have a test case that seems to work, just add > some verify_subtree_at_position's and enjoy "free" checks for the > functionality without writing (complicated & too loose) tree traversal > + assertion code manually. One important aspect I forgot to mention - this is not just about lazy authoring of new tests. This is about making the existing tests more strict with a very low development cost (sprinkling around verify_subtree_at_position's liberally). -- Ville M. Vainio http://tinyurl.com/vainio --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
