Would it be possible to mock the dub tool for a unit test? (Or even for a E2E test?)
On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 8:13 PM, Russel Winder <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, 2017-04-18 at 09:24 -0700, Bill Deegan wrote: > > Unitesting is there to make sure that no unintention breakage occurs. > > I'm not willing to take a major piece of code into SCons core without > > tests. > > > > That would violate SCons's practices. > > Excellent position, I have no problems with that. For tools I think the > end-to-end tests are essential, and the SCons test framework very > usable. > > The question is though that if the _Library type is not exposed is > there actually a test obligation if all the publicly exposed things > (the builders) are exercised by end-to-end tests. > > Having said this I am still working on a test for fetching a package > from a local area and installing on a local area so it fits in the test > framework, but it doesn't really emulate what happens in a real case, > so it is not clear to me what is actually being tested, and whether the > test is actually useful. My worry is that such a test simply tests > whether Dub does what it says it does, which is nothing to do with > SCons and the dub tool per se. > > On the other hand there are now function in the dub tool that could use > a bit of testing for confidence sake. I am trying to work out how best > to do that with an end to end perspective. > > -- > Russel. > ============================================================ > ================= > Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: > sip:[email protected] > 41 Buckmaster Road m: +44 7770 465 077 xmpp: [email protected] > London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk skype: russel_winder > > _______________________________________________ > Scons-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev > >
_______________________________________________ Scons-dev mailing list [email protected] https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
