* Ovid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-01-05 20:15]:
> How about this instead?
>
> --
>
> Failed Test | Total | Fail | List of Failed | TODO Passed
> ------------+-------+------+--------------------+----------------
> t/bar.t | 13| 4|2, 6-8 |3-4
> ------------+-------+------+--------------------+----------------
> t/foo.t | 10| 1|5 |
>
> Time: 0 wallclock secs ( 0.10 cusr + 0.01 csys = 0.11 CPU)
> Files=3. Failed 2/3 test programs. 5/33 subtests failed.
Better, but it has flaws.
• The horizontal lines are too noisy.
• The column labels are too wide and conversely the lack of cell
padding makes it unnecessarily uneven in blackness.
• The “Files=3” bit, while a minor issue, is just ugly.
• The failed tests and passing TODO tests columns can be
empty, in which case they’re a huge waste of space.
I think the following format reconciles the various points best
(note: this is the same data as in your example, except that it
assumes 4 test files in total):
Test file | Failed | Bad tests
----------+---+----+-----------------------------------------
t/bar.t : 4 / 13 : Fail: 2, 6-8; Pass TODO: 3-4
t/foo.t : 1 / 10 : Fail: 5
... (2) : / 10
Total (4) : 5 / 33 : Non-passing files: 2
Time: 0 wallclock secs (0.10 cusr + 0.01 csys = 0.11 CPU)
Note that the “Failed” header spans two columns.
The “... (#)” ellipsis line for passed test files is there to
supply the count of passed tests so the totals line is more
logical. It has the side benefit of calling out explicitly how
many files are omitted from the output; I like that. For polish,
if the count of ellipsised test files is exactly 1, you could
just show the one filename instead of ellipsising it.
This format is much denser but also more evenly spaced than
yours. There’s more noise than in Andy’s proposition simply
because it’s a table but the non-variable bits are also more
easily scannable. (In a longer example this would *really* show.)
And though I picked meaningful characters as column separators to
visually lighten the “chart junk,” it now occurs to me that this
also means the format is minimally legible when rendered in a
proportional font. It is also seems easier to implement to me
than your format because there’s only a single column with really
variable content width and it’s the trailing right column.
Regards,
--
Aristotle Pagaltzis // <http://plasmasturm.org/>
