Sorry to parasite this mailing-list, but I'm trying to design the
testing aspect of XCVB right now. The constraint is that we want to be
able to use make as a backend, and that test results should thus be
reified as files if we want to avoid re-running already-computed
tests.
My dim ideas about it
Nikodemus Siivola wrote:
> 2009/8/5 Robert Goldman :
>
>> Part of the problem with test-op is that the desired behavior has not
>> been specified by the ASDF community. Because of the nature of ASDF, it
>> is impossible for
>>
>> (asdf:test-system )
>>
>> to return a value indicating whether or n
Nikodemus Siivola wrote:
> 2009/8/5 Robert Goldman :
>
>> Part of the problem with test-op is that the desired behavior has not
>> been specified by the ASDF community. Because of the nature of ASDF, it
>> is impossible for
>>
>> (asdf:test-system )
>>
>> to return a value indicating whether or n
Gary King wrote:
>> Part of the problem with test-op is that the desired behavior has not
>> been specified by the ASDF community. Because of the nature of ASDF, it
>> is impossible for
>>
>> (asdf:test-system )
>>
>> to return a value indicating whether or not has passed its
>> tests.
>
> FWIW,
Hi James,
mix stream delegation into the operation based on the slot value.
I don't think I understand. Can you provide a pseudo-example?
thanks,
--
Gary Warren King, metabang.com
Cell: (413) 559 8738
Fax: (206) 338-4052
gwkkwg on Skype * garethsan on AIM * gwking on twitter
_
2009/8/5 Robert Goldman :
> Part of the problem with test-op is that the desired behavior has not
> been specified by the ASDF community. Because of the nature of ASDF, it
> is impossible for
>
> (asdf:test-system )
>
> to return a value indicating whether or not has passed its tests.
I would p
On 2009-08-05, at 21:22 , Gary King wrote:
...
Some time ago, I proposed that ASDF provide a stream argument to the
test-op, providing a place into which the testing tool could dump its
test report for human inspection. I can't say that this suggestion
received universal approbation. Or disa
> Part of the problem with test-op is that the desired behavior has not
> been specified by the ASDF community. Because of the nature of
> ASDF, it
> is impossible for
>
> (asdf:test-system )
>
> to return a value indicating whether or not has passed its
> tests.
FWIW, I recently changed ope
Tobias C. Rittweiler wrote:
> Juan Jose Garcia-Ripoll writes:
>
>> What I would like to ask CL developers is to begin shipping regression
>> tests with their libraries, and perhaps agree on an standard so that
>> one can programatically check whether a library builds or not. This
>> feature could
Juan Jose Garcia-Ripoll writes:
> What I would like to ask CL developers is to begin shipping regression
> tests with their libraries, and perhaps agree on an standard so that
> one can programatically check whether a library builds or not. This
> feature could be even included in ASDF, asdf-insta
2009/8/5 Greg Bennett :
> As far as I can see, :pathname in asdf plays the role of :source-pathname.
> In looking for examples, I found the following in the mcclim.asd file:
> .. ((:module "Tests"
> :pathname #.(make-pathname :directory '(:relative "Drei" "Tests"))
> :components
> ..
> A
11 matches
Mail list logo
