Hi all,
as you know, one of the tools that we have for testing is idlharness.
What it does is basically that it processes some WebIDL, is given some
objects that correspond to it, and it tests them for a bunch of pesky
aspects that one should not have to test by hand.
One of the issues with idlharness is that it has long been based on
webidl.js which was a quick and dirty WebIDL parser that I'd written
because I needed it for a project that petered out. This meant that it
increasingly didn't support newer constructs in WebIDL that are now in
common use.
In order to remedy this, I have now made an updated version of
idlharness that uses webidl2.js, a much better parser that is believed
to be rather complete and correct (at least, it tests well against the
WebIDL tests that we have). The newer webidl2.js does bring as much
backwards compatibility with webidl.js as possible, but in a number of
cases that simply wasn't possible (because WebIDL has changed too much
to fit well into the previous model, and also because mistakes were made
with it).
You can find the updated version of idlharness in this branch:
https://github.com/w3c/testharness.js/tree/webidl2
The reason I'm prodding you is that idlharness, ironically enough, does
not have a test suite. Because of that, I can't be entirely comfortable
that the updated version works well and doesn't break existing usage.
I've tested it with some existing content (e.g.
http://berjon.com/tmp/geotest/) but that's no guarantee.
So if you've been using idlharness, I'd like to hear about it. If you
could give the new version a ride to see if you get the same results
it'd be lovely. Once I hear back from enough people that it works (or if
no one says anything) I'll merge the changes to the master branch.
Thanks!
--
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
