Stéphane Ducasse wrote: > Thanks keith > After I really wonder if we need all that. > I would be really interested in understanding what are the 20% nost > useful features > and focus on them. > > Stef 1. The old suite building code was a mess and had lots of duplication for very little functionality. Here we get much more for less code.
For the rest, I suggest looking at the feature set backwards, start with the basic uber-use case* and see what features are needed to support it. * I implemented much of this for my own project in st/x 10 years ago, and have missed it ever since. 2. Use Case: Be able to run... "All tests or specifications for my project which are expected to run on this platform, this image version, and this vm... with the ability to mark tests as 'expected failures', 'to do' , 'slow', 'long', 'uses network' etc, and then be able to run a suite with or without the marked tests. btw: The next refactoring is to remove the whole notion of expectedFailures from TestResult and further simplify things. I asked on squeak-dev over a year ago to ascertain whether there are any users of this confusing feature, and I don't think there are any. Keith _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
