On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 10:21 AM, James E Keenan <[email protected]> wrote: > ext/nqp-rx/src/stage0/nqp-setting.pm is failing 3 coding standards tests: > > t/codingstd/copyright.t > t/codingstd/perlcritic.t > t/codingstd/svn_id.t > > The test failure reports are attached. (It was also failing > t/distro/file_metadata.t, but I think I have fixed that in r46701.) > > This file is written in NQP -- which might mean that some of our coding > standards developed for Perl 5 files ought not to apply. But what is more > important here is that this file is (a) a generated file stored in the > Parrot repository for (I am told) bootstrapping purposes; and (b) generated > outside of Parrot. > > Looking into this file, we see: > > # This file automatically generated by build/gen_setting.pl. > > However, there is no file called gen_setting.pl in the Parrot MANIFEST or > SVN repository. > > From looking at dalek's posts on #parrot, my *guess* is that this file is > actually generated in the NQP repository and then deposited in the ext/ > directory inside the Parrot repository. > > So we have two problems: > > 1. How do we get this file to satisfy our codingstd tests in time for > Tuesday's release? (These failures preclude a PASS on 'make codetest' and > therefore on the 'make fulltest' the release manager has to run.) > > 2. More generally, what standards must files deposited in ext/ meet? > > Thank you very much. > kid51 > > _______________________________________________ > http://lists.parrot.org/mailman/listinfo/parrot-dev > >
The answer to both of these questions is that ext/ should never be considered when running codingstandards tests. -- Will "Coke" Coleda _______________________________________________ http://lists.parrot.org/mailman/listinfo/parrot-dev
