Hi, On Saturday 30 October 2010, meik michalke wrote: > did anyone yet have a look at the changes i did to the rkwardtests package > and docs on plugin writing recently? i did most of that during longer > train rides.
I have not read too closely (I'm currently mostly working on turning the implementation of the R backend upside down in a separate branch in SVN), but I did have a look at the SVN commit diffs, and that looks good to me. There is a warning while installing the rkwardtests package: ** help Warning: ./man/rktest.replaceRunAgainLink.Rd:20: unexpected '}' Could you take a look at that? > - rkwardtests: > i made it use an enviroment called .rktest.tmp.storage in globalenv now, > which should be created automatically if needed, as well as removed if > empty. should this be moved some place else? I don't think it matters too much, where this is placed. But since you're asking: It is probably a good idea to (try to) keep the globalenv() as clean as possible. So you could move that environment to the rkwardtests- package/namespace itself. That could also simplify the code a tiny bit, as you could create the environment unconditionally, once, and leave it in place, even when it is empty. > does it work without flaws > for you? I did not test the latest version, yet, but interim versions worked fine for me. A few tests fail due to using internals of the old implementation, such as misusing rktest-functions as "data" (the "package_skeleton"-test for example). Perhaps you could take a look at those, too? > i also took care of one TODO i found in the code comments -- if a > test was skipped due to missing packages, the results should list only the > *missing* libs now. Great! > - docs: > there's a whole new chapter on external plugins now. i hope i got it all > right. primarily i wonder whether the section on meta information (<about>) > should either become a part of the ordinary plugin writing sections, or be > linked to from there. none of the new tags are listed in the reference yet, > though. I am not sure what is the best way to structure this. But in fact, the section on meta-information applies to ordinary plugins as well. Perhaps put it into an independent section, and reference that from both the "external plugins" and "ordinary plugins" sections. I guess we should find one unique name for those downloadable archives of (one or more) external plugins, and use that, consistently, across the documentation, but also in the GUI. I suggest "plugin pack". Other suggestions? Regards Thomas
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Nokia and AT&T present the 2010 Calling All Innovators-North America contest Create new apps & games for the Nokia N8 for consumers in U.S. and Canada $10 million total in prizes - $4M cash, 500 devices, nearly $6M in marketing Develop with Nokia Qt SDK, Web Runtime, or Java and Publish to Ovi Store http://p.sf.net/sfu/nokia-dev2dev
_______________________________________________ RKWard-devel mailing list RKWard-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rkward-devel
