On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 11:07 AM, tfer <[email protected]> wrote: > There are a number of different testing frameworks that have you write > tests into another file for use by some test runner. > > Rather than maintain such a file under its own head and bopping back > and further to flesh out the code and then tests, I was wondering if > it makes sense to allow a file generating head, (like @file), to have > a two file variation, where the second file is the test file to be > created from those directives that start, say, @test-file, (maybe @tf > for short). Anything not so marked would be collected and expanded as > normal into the first file.
I have some sympathy for your idea, but the @<file> read/write logic is already at the breaking point as far as complexity goes, both from the point of view of users understanding and from the standpoint of implementation complexity. There are several possible approaches that are possible now: 1. Create test files or @test nodes using clones. BTW, cross-file clones in this kind of situation should be safe, as long as one only changes the "main" file containing the clones. 2. Create a Leo script that will search for various nodes, and create test nodes or test files from a Leo outline, say from nodes that start with @test-file <file name>. HTH. Edward -- 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.
