On 2/1/06, chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Having the test suite quit and say Sorry, don't use this -- it works better
than we expect seems awfully silly. Again, there's already a way to catch
your (rare) catastrophic bonus tests -- capture and check their return
values.
Yes it is silly.
On 2/5/06, demerphq [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2/1/06, chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Having the test suite quit and say Sorry, don't use this -- it works better
than we expect seems awfully silly. Again, there's already a way to catch
your (rare) catastrophic bonus tests -- capture
* demerphq [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-02-01T03:26:55]
And I think you've conveniently sidestepped my main point which is
that TODO tests passing are errors. Consider you have two TODO tests,
both of which depend on a common set of functionality. Both should
pass or both should fail.
I just don't
On 1/31/06, chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tuesday 31 January 2006 11:44, A. Pagaltzis wrote:
* chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-01-31 19:40]:
Write your own. perldoc Test::Harness::Straps or see the
examples in chapter 3 of the Perl Testing book:
That's not a long-term answer
On 1/31/06, chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tuesday 31 January 2006 12:22, A. Pagaltzis wrote:
Adding more information to the default Test::Harness summary doesn't make
sense to me. It's a user tool. It's important to list failures there, as
the code might not work right, but
On 1/31/06, chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tuesday 31 January 2006 13:31, A. Pagaltzis wrote:
Hmm. That's a good point. Maybe the way to approach this would be
to include a default harness for use by developer tools, which
would include more chattiness about passing TODO tests.
My
On Wednesday 01 February 2006 00:26, demerphq wrote:
And I think you've conveniently sidestepped my main point which is
that TODO tests passing are errors.
I didn't sidestep it. I just disagree.
Consider you have two TODO tests,
both of which depend on a common set of functionality. Both
Here's my test-first TODO test management paradox:
If I write a failing test and share it through the central repo,
the smoke bot fails and keeps sending us e-mail until it is fixed,
which can be annoying when these are un-implemented features and not
bugs. The effect can be quit paying attention
On 1/31/06, Mark Stosberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here's my test-first TODO test management paradox:
If I write a failing test and share it through the central repo,
the smoke bot fails and keeps sending us e-mail until it is fixed,
which can be annoying when these are un-implemented
On Jan 31, 2006, at 10:40 AM, demerphq wrote:
While only indirectly related.
Lately when ive built blead I see stuff like 10 TODO tests
unexpectedly passed!
So far ive not found a way to make harness tell me which they are...
So i too would like a report of TODO tests, both those passing
On 1/31/06, Chris Dolan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 31, 2006, at 10:40 AM, demerphq wrote:
While only indirectly related.
Lately when ive built blead I see stuff like 10 TODO tests
unexpectedly passed!
So far ive not found a way to make harness tell me which they are...
* chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-01-31 19:40]:
Write your own. perldoc Test::Harness::Straps or see the
examples in chapter 3 of the Perl Testing book:
That’s not a long-term answer though, is it?
I agree with Yves here, this is stuff that needs to be useful by
default.
Regards,
--
On Tuesday 31 January 2006 11:44, A. Pagaltzis wrote:
* chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-01-31 19:40]:
Write your own. perldoc Test::Harness::Straps or see the
examples in chapter 3 of the Perl Testing book:
That’s not a long-term answer though, is it?
Why not? You know more about your
* chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-01-31 20:55]:
You know more about your application and your team and your
requirements than Test::Harness does.
I don’t see “unexpectedly successful TODO tests should be treated
like other failures” as particularly application-specific.
There's also always
On Tuesday 31 January 2006 12:22, A. Pagaltzis wrote:
I definitely want to be notified automatically of passing TODO
tests, and apparently at least three others care enough to post
about it on this list. Conversely, I’m pretty sure that of those
who don’t *want* it, most simply don’t care,
* chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-01-31 21:40]:
Improving prove to show more diagnostics makes a lot of sense to
me. It's a developer tool. I've long wanted better failure
reporting.
Adding more information to the default Test::Harness summary
doesn't make sense to me. It's a user tool.
Hmm.
On Tuesday 31 January 2006 13:31, A. Pagaltzis wrote:
Hmm. That’s a good point. Maybe the way to approach this would be
to include a default harness for use by developer tools, which
would include more chattiness about passing TODO tests.
My perfect developer tool would complain noisily about
* chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-01-31 22:50]:
How would that work for you?
Sounds exactly like things should be.
Regards,
--
Aristotle Pagaltzis // http://plasmasturm.org/
18 matches
Mail list logo
