2016-09-16 14:25 GMT+02:00 Nicolai Hess <nicolaih...@gmail.com>:

> 2016-09-16 13:42 GMT+02:00 Clément Bera <bera.clem...@gmail.com>:
>> Why don't you just change nautilus to have two text areas, one with the
>> test corresponding to the method and the other one with the method's code ?
>> You're saying:
>> *Their values is active documentation that can be automatically
>> validated.*
>> That can also be applied to test we've already had with SUnit. If the
>> only difference you want is to display the test next to the method, then
>> it's an IDE problem, nothing has to be changed but the IDE.
> This is what I thought first, we already have the association between
> methods and tests, Nautilus can detect if there
> is a corresponding test , for example browse Fraction>>truncated, it will
> show a test icon, that will run the test FractionTest>>#testTruncated.
> This works already good, and I think we don't need special comments or
> pragmas for this.
> But what stef wants is
> 1. Method docs with examples, so a user can see an example usage of a
> method (sunit test methods sometimes aren't good "examples")

I'd prefer to have a Pillar doc for my class / package / project with live
code portions, with a link method to chapter. We use examples inside
comments because we don't have anything better...

> 2. We already had (and still have) some method docs where the example code
> just won't work anymore because the methods or classes used
>  by the example were removed, renamed. So, it would be good if we can
> extract these examples and run them automatically to make sure they
> are still working.

This one is independant of the syntax. If they are in, say, the Pillar
description of the class, of course they can be tested and run everytime we
save a new version of the package ? Or as a test case?

What about examples that create views, windows and external files? How do
we test they are still valid without making those a sunit test with a

> But yes, maybe we can still solve this with better Tools, not working only
> on the plain text in comments.

Exactly. Moreover given what we're focusing on with GT.


Reply via email to