On Thu, Nov 12, 2015, at 05:57 PM, David Faure wrote: > On 11/12/2015 04:38 AM, Chris Cannam wrote: > > The only thing that puzzles me is -- why is it necessary to switch build > > systems just to add unit tests? A test is just a small program, it > > shouldn't be hard to build. > > This isn't exactly true. A unit test is not just a standalone program, it > uses classes from the application. So the application can no longer be a > single monolith, it needs to provide libraries that the unittests can link to.
I'm inclined to think of a unit test as another application built using the same code but happening to have a different entry point. You don't have to have libraries to do that, still less shared ones, but if you do use static libraries, it's still not all that complicated to do. It strikes me that switching to a different build system (regardless of which one) is always a lot more work than that. Still, I'm not here to argue about it, I just wondered what the motivating problem was for you. I'm not especially fond of shared libraries because of the potential for installation versioning problems -- I really like the fact that RG these days is, aside from system libraries, a single executable. Certainly it would link faster, but although linking RG used to be rather onerous, it can't be that bad for most developers now -- on this year-old laptop it now takes (goes off and runs "rm rosegarden ; time make") a whole 1.3 seconds. Anyway, it's clear you have a warm enough welcome for the idea that you should certainly go for it and see how it turns out. Chris ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Rosegarden-devel mailing list Rosegarden-devel@lists.sourceforge.net - use the link below to unsubscribe https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rosegarden-devel
