Re: Review Request 115634: Add kconfig_compiler autotest that checks whether signals are emitted

2014-02-20 Thread Aleix Pol Gonzalez

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115634/#review50388
---

Ship it!


Ship It!

- Aleix Pol Gonzalez


On Feb. 20, 2014, 3:53 p.m., Alexander Richardson wrote:
 
 ---
 This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
 https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115634/
 ---
 
 (Updated Feb. 20, 2014, 3:53 p.m.)
 
 
 Review request for KDE Frameworks.
 
 
 Repository: kconfig
 
 
 Description
 ---
 
 Add kconfig_compiler autotest that checks whether signals are emitted
 
 Currently this works when using the setters, however when using
 setProperty() on the KCoreConfigSkeleton* (as done by KConfigDialog) no
 signals are emitted.
 
 
 Diffs
 -
 
   autotests/kconfig_compiler/signals_test_no_singleton_dpointer.kcfgc 
 PRE-CREATION 
   autotests/kconfig_compiler/signals_test_singleton.kcfgc PRE-CREATION 
   autotests/kconfig_compiler/signals_test_singleton_dpointer.kcfgc 
 PRE-CREATION 
   autotests/kconfig_compiler/CMakeLists.txt 
 a2ebb9453bacb2c7507bc9477b6753a34bbcd434 
   autotests/kconfig_compiler/kconfigcompiler_test_signals.cpp PRE-CREATION 
   autotests/kconfig_compiler/signals_test.kcfg PRE-CREATION 
   autotests/kconfig_compiler/signals_test_no_singleton.kcfgc PRE-CREATION 
 
 Diff: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115634/diff/
 
 
 Testing
 ---
 
 Compiles, tests fail until https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115635/ is 
 applied, then they pass.
 
 Rather ugly code IMO, open for suggestions to improve it...
 
 
 Thanks,
 
 Alexander Richardson
 


___
Kde-frameworks-devel mailing list
Kde-frameworks-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-frameworks-devel


Re: Review Request 115634: Add kconfig_compiler autotest that checks whether signals are emitted

2014-02-20 Thread Alexander Richardson

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115634/
---

(Updated Feb. 20, 2014, 5:15 p.m.)


Status
--

This change has been marked as submitted.


Review request for KDE Frameworks.


Repository: kconfig


Description
---

Add kconfig_compiler autotest that checks whether signals are emitted

Currently this works when using the setters, however when using
setProperty() on the KCoreConfigSkeleton* (as done by KConfigDialog) no
signals are emitted.


Diffs
-

  autotests/kconfig_compiler/signals_test_no_singleton_dpointer.kcfgc 
PRE-CREATION 
  autotests/kconfig_compiler/signals_test_singleton.kcfgc PRE-CREATION 
  autotests/kconfig_compiler/signals_test_singleton_dpointer.kcfgc PRE-CREATION 
  autotests/kconfig_compiler/CMakeLists.txt 
a2ebb9453bacb2c7507bc9477b6753a34bbcd434 
  autotests/kconfig_compiler/kconfigcompiler_test_signals.cpp PRE-CREATION 
  autotests/kconfig_compiler/signals_test.kcfg PRE-CREATION 
  autotests/kconfig_compiler/signals_test_no_singleton.kcfgc PRE-CREATION 

Diff: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115634/diff/


Testing
---

Compiles, tests fail until https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115635/ is 
applied, then they pass.

Rather ugly code IMO, open for suggestions to improve it...


Thanks,

Alexander Richardson

___
Kde-frameworks-devel mailing list
Kde-frameworks-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-frameworks-devel


Re: Review Request 115634: Add kconfig_compiler autotest that checks whether signals are emitted

2014-02-20 Thread Commit Hook

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115634/#review50389
---


This review has been submitted with commit 
6d3a4405fc2723f5796e845247b6b0eb0448216e by Alex Richardson to branch master.

- Commit Hook


On Feb. 20, 2014, 3:53 p.m., Alexander Richardson wrote:
 
 ---
 This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
 https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115634/
 ---
 
 (Updated Feb. 20, 2014, 3:53 p.m.)
 
 
 Review request for KDE Frameworks.
 
 
 Repository: kconfig
 
 
 Description
 ---
 
 Add kconfig_compiler autotest that checks whether signals are emitted
 
 Currently this works when using the setters, however when using
 setProperty() on the KCoreConfigSkeleton* (as done by KConfigDialog) no
 signals are emitted.
 
 
 Diffs
 -
 
   autotests/kconfig_compiler/signals_test_no_singleton_dpointer.kcfgc 
 PRE-CREATION 
   autotests/kconfig_compiler/signals_test_singleton.kcfgc PRE-CREATION 
   autotests/kconfig_compiler/signals_test_singleton_dpointer.kcfgc 
 PRE-CREATION 
   autotests/kconfig_compiler/CMakeLists.txt 
 a2ebb9453bacb2c7507bc9477b6753a34bbcd434 
   autotests/kconfig_compiler/kconfigcompiler_test_signals.cpp PRE-CREATION 
   autotests/kconfig_compiler/signals_test.kcfg PRE-CREATION 
   autotests/kconfig_compiler/signals_test_no_singleton.kcfgc PRE-CREATION 
 
 Diff: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115634/diff/
 
 
 Testing
 ---
 
 Compiles, tests fail until https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115635/ is 
 applied, then they pass.
 
 Rather ugly code IMO, open for suggestions to improve it...
 
 
 Thanks,
 
 Alexander Richardson
 


___
Kde-frameworks-devel mailing list
Kde-frameworks-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-frameworks-devel


Re: Review Request 115634: Add kconfig_compiler autotest that checks whether signals are emitted

2014-02-17 Thread Alexander Richardson


 On Feb. 17, 2014, 7:39 a.m., Matthew John Dawson wrote:
  autotests/kconfig_compiler/kconfigcompiler_test_signals.cpp, line 26
  https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115634/diff/1/?file=243130#file243130line26
 
  Is this a copy + paste error?

Yes, leftover from old version of this unittest


 On Feb. 17, 2014, 7:39 a.m., Matthew John Dawson wrote:
  autotests/kconfig_compiler/kconfigcompiler_test_signals.cpp, line 153
  https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115634/diff/1/?file=243130#file243130line153
 
  As this appears to preform the same check as the function below, I 
  rather just have the one set of tests.  As the previous test breaks up the 
  different elements under test such that Qt sees the different tests, I 
  prefer for that version to be used.

Doesn't quite do the same thing. This test checks that signals get emitted when 
using the generated setters. The other test uses the reflective approach with 
setProperty().

This test actually mostly works before 
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115635/ except for the last check with 
setDefaults().
The second test function only starts working after the patch to kconfig_compiler


 On Feb. 17, 2014, 7:39 a.m., Matthew John Dawson wrote:
  autotests/kconfig_compiler/kconfigcompiler_test_signals.cpp, line 226
  https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115634/diff/1/?file=243130#file243130line226
 
  As the solution for this problem ends up being a wrapper that works for 
  every type that correctly implements the KConfigSkeletonItem contract, I 
  don't think we need to test every possible type.  Did you experience any 
  particular issues with the other types?  Otherwise I rather just test one 
  type, which should help speed up the test suite.

Do you mean every type of generated KConfigSkeleton (dpointer vs no dpointer 
and singleton vs no singleton) or every type of stored data (QString vs int, 
etc).

I actually found a bug in kconfig_compiler due to testing every type: 
https://projects.kde.org/projects/frameworks/kconfig/repository/revisions/b1487f0c6b4ea64ae9c1ce96348fce8b5f0828df

But in general there should be no difference depending on what gets saved. 
Maybe there should be another unit test that generates a class that uses config 
items of every possible type to make sure something like this does not happen 
and restrict the signals test to a single property. Don't really which solution 
gets chosen, but I guess I can then finally get rid of that ugly macro in 
testSetters


- Alexander


---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115634/#review50007
---


On Feb. 11, 2014, 1:47 a.m., Alexander Richardson wrote:
 
 ---
 This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
 https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115634/
 ---
 
 (Updated Feb. 11, 2014, 1:47 a.m.)
 
 
 Review request for KDE Frameworks.
 
 
 Repository: kconfig
 
 
 Description
 ---
 
 Add kconfig_compiler autotest that checks whether signals are emitted
 
 Currently this works when using the setters, however when using
 setProperty() on the KCoreConfigSkeleton* (as done by KConfigDialog) no
 signals are emitted.
 
 
 Diffs
 -
 
   autotests/kconfig_compiler/CMakeLists.txt 
 a2ebb9453bacb2c7507bc9477b6753a34bbcd434 
   autotests/kconfig_compiler/kconfigcompiler_test_signals.cpp PRE-CREATION 
   autotests/kconfig_compiler/signals_test.kcfg PRE-CREATION 
   autotests/kconfig_compiler/signals_test_no_singleton.kcfgc PRE-CREATION 
   autotests/kconfig_compiler/signals_test_no_singleton_dpointer.kcfgc 
 PRE-CREATION 
   autotests/kconfig_compiler/signals_test_singleton.kcfgc PRE-CREATION 
   autotests/kconfig_compiler/signals_test_singleton_dpointer.kcfgc 
 PRE-CREATION 
 
 Diff: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115634/diff/
 
 
 Testing
 ---
 
 Compiles, tests fail until https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115635/ is 
 applied, then they pass.
 
 Rather ugly code IMO, open for suggestions to improve it...
 
 
 Thanks,
 
 Alexander Richardson
 


___
Kde-frameworks-devel mailing list
Kde-frameworks-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-frameworks-devel


Re: Review Request 115634: Add kconfig_compiler autotest that checks whether signals are emitted

2014-02-17 Thread Matthew John Dawson


 On Feb. 17, 2014, 1:39 a.m., Matthew John Dawson wrote:
  autotests/kconfig_compiler/kconfigcompiler_test_signals.cpp, line 153
  https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115634/diff/1/?file=243130#file243130line153
 
  As this appears to preform the same check as the function below, I 
  rather just have the one set of tests.  As the previous test breaks up the 
  different elements under test such that Qt sees the different tests, I 
  prefer for that version to be used.
 
 Alexander Richardson wrote:
 Doesn't quite do the same thing. This test checks that signals get 
 emitted when using the generated setters. The other test uses the reflective 
 approach with setProperty().
 
 This test actually mostly works before 
 https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115635/ except for the last check with 
 setDefaults().
 The second test function only starts working after the patch to 
 kconfig_compiler

Ah, I see.  Can you merge the two sets of tests, so that they both use the data 
driven system?  I just prefer the output Qt generates when that is used.


 On Feb. 17, 2014, 1:39 a.m., Matthew John Dawson wrote:
  autotests/kconfig_compiler/kconfigcompiler_test_signals.cpp, line 226
  https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115634/diff/1/?file=243130#file243130line226
 
  As the solution for this problem ends up being a wrapper that works for 
  every type that correctly implements the KConfigSkeletonItem contract, I 
  don't think we need to test every possible type.  Did you experience any 
  particular issues with the other types?  Otherwise I rather just test one 
  type, which should help speed up the test suite.
 
 Alexander Richardson wrote:
 Do you mean every type of generated KConfigSkeleton (dpointer vs no 
 dpointer and singleton vs no singleton) or every type of stored data (QString 
 vs int, etc).
 
 I actually found a bug in kconfig_compiler due to testing every type: 
 https://projects.kde.org/projects/frameworks/kconfig/repository/revisions/b1487f0c6b4ea64ae9c1ce96348fce8b5f0828df
 
 But in general there should be no difference depending on what gets 
 saved. Maybe there should be another unit test that generates a class that 
 uses config items of every possible type to make sure something like this 
 does not happen and restrict the signals test to a single property. Don't 
 really which solution gets chosen, but I guess I can then finally get rid of 
 that ugly macro in testSetters

Sorry, I meant types of data stored.  I think reducing this down to one single 
data type is best, as it avoids testing too many different ideas in one set of 
tests.  In the future, it definitely would be good to have all the different 
types tested.

I think it is good to test the different ways KConfigSekeleton is generated, as 
the type does change how signals are generated.


- Matthew John


---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115634/#review50007
---


On Feb. 10, 2014, 7:47 p.m., Alexander Richardson wrote:
 
 ---
 This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
 https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115634/
 ---
 
 (Updated Feb. 10, 2014, 7:47 p.m.)
 
 
 Review request for KDE Frameworks.
 
 
 Repository: kconfig
 
 
 Description
 ---
 
 Add kconfig_compiler autotest that checks whether signals are emitted
 
 Currently this works when using the setters, however when using
 setProperty() on the KCoreConfigSkeleton* (as done by KConfigDialog) no
 signals are emitted.
 
 
 Diffs
 -
 
   autotests/kconfig_compiler/CMakeLists.txt 
 a2ebb9453bacb2c7507bc9477b6753a34bbcd434 
   autotests/kconfig_compiler/kconfigcompiler_test_signals.cpp PRE-CREATION 
   autotests/kconfig_compiler/signals_test.kcfg PRE-CREATION 
   autotests/kconfig_compiler/signals_test_no_singleton.kcfgc PRE-CREATION 
   autotests/kconfig_compiler/signals_test_no_singleton_dpointer.kcfgc 
 PRE-CREATION 
   autotests/kconfig_compiler/signals_test_singleton.kcfgc PRE-CREATION 
   autotests/kconfig_compiler/signals_test_singleton_dpointer.kcfgc 
 PRE-CREATION 
 
 Diff: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115634/diff/
 
 
 Testing
 ---
 
 Compiles, tests fail until https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115635/ is 
 applied, then they pass.
 
 Rather ugly code IMO, open for suggestions to improve it...
 
 
 Thanks,
 
 Alexander Richardson
 


___
Kde-frameworks-devel mailing list
Kde-frameworks-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-frameworks-devel


Review Request 115634: Add kconfig_compiler autotest that checks whether signals are emitted

2014-02-10 Thread Alexander Richardson

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115634/
---

Review request for KDE Frameworks.


Repository: kconfig


Description
---

Add kconfig_compiler autotest that checks whether signals are emitted

Currently this works when using the setters, however when using
setProperty() on the KCoreConfigSkeleton* (as done by KConfigDialog) no
signals are emitted.


Diffs
-

  autotests/kconfig_compiler/CMakeLists.txt 
a2ebb9453bacb2c7507bc9477b6753a34bbcd434 
  autotests/kconfig_compiler/kconfigcompiler_test_signals.cpp PRE-CREATION 
  autotests/kconfig_compiler/signals_test.kcfg PRE-CREATION 
  autotests/kconfig_compiler/signals_test_no_singleton.kcfgc PRE-CREATION 
  autotests/kconfig_compiler/signals_test_no_singleton_dpointer.kcfgc 
PRE-CREATION 
  autotests/kconfig_compiler/signals_test_singleton.kcfgc PRE-CREATION 
  autotests/kconfig_compiler/signals_test_singleton_dpointer.kcfgc PRE-CREATION 

Diff: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115634/diff/


Testing
---

Compiles, tests fail until https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115635/ is 
applied, then they pass.

Rather ugly code IMO, open for suggestions to improve it...


Thanks,

Alexander Richardson

___
Kde-frameworks-devel mailing list
Kde-frameworks-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-frameworks-devel