jerry gay wrote: > On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 5:26 AM, Moritz Lenz > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Many people who try out Rakudo want to inform us about hanging or >> failing "make spectest" - which is expected to fail until we implement >> all of Perl 6 that is currently tested. >> >> Therefore I'd like to rename 'spectest_regression' to 'spectest', and >> provide a 'spectest_full' for running all tests. Attached patch does >> that, thoughts (and testing on various platforms) welcome. (To >> paraphrase Nicholas: "Works on my machine", ie on boring 32 bit Linux). >> The old "spectest_regression" remains as an alias. >> >> Should I also rename t/spectest_regression.data to t/spectest.data? >> > during this week's design meeting, i mentioned that i think it's time > to rename 'spectest_regression' to 'test'.
Even better ;-) > we didn't discuss it much, > but i imagine something like: > > test : coretest codetest spectest_regression > > with appropriate documentation changes. In principle yes, but running them all in sequence is a bad idea, because you'll only see the summary of the one that runs last, so you're likely to miss failures from earlier test blocks. A combined harness is much better in terms of reporting. > the tests we expect to pass reliably should be the default tests we > run. we expect all spectest_regression tests to pass reliably. the > default test target should always be named 'test'. it seems natural > that we add spectest_regression to the 'test' makefile target. > additionally, this would have possibly prevented the 74 failures > post-mdd-merge, since allison didn't know about the additional test > target in the makefile. well, if reading the README is too much even for our architect then we shouldn't assume that anybody else does ;-) Moritz -- Moritz Lenz http://perlgeek.de/ | http://perl-6.de/ | http://sudokugarden.de/
