Re: About Automated Unit Test for Wget

2008-04-05 Thread Yoshihiro Tanaka
2008/4/4, Micah Cowan [EMAIL PROTECTED]: IMO, if it's worth testing, it's probably better to have external linkage anyway. I got it. 1) Select functions which can be tested in unit test. But How can I select them? is difficult. Basically the less dependency the function

Re: About Automated Unit Test for Wget

2008-04-05 Thread Yoshihiro Tanaka
2008/4/5, Yoshihiro Tanaka [EMAIL PROTECTED]: 2008/4/4, Micah Cowan [EMAIL PROTECTED]: IMO, if it's worth testing, it's probably better to have external linkage anyway. I got it. 1) Select functions which can be tested in unit test. But How can I select them? is

Re: About Automated Unit Test for Wget

2008-04-05 Thread Micah Cowan
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Yoshihiro Tanaka wrote: 2008/4/5, Yoshihiro Tanaka [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Yes, since I want to write proposal for Unit testing, I can't skip this problem. But considering GSoC program is only 2 month, I'd rather narrow down the target - to gethttp

Re: About Automated Unit Test for Wget

2008-04-05 Thread Daniel Stenberg
On Sat, 5 Apr 2008, Micah Cowan wrote: Or did you mean to write wget version of socket interface? i.e. to write our version of socket, connect,write,read,close,bind, listen,accept,,,? sorry I'm confused. Yes! That's what I meant. (Except, we don't need listen, accept; and we only need bind

Re: About Automated Unit Test for Wget

2008-04-05 Thread Hrvoje Niksic
Micah Cowan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Or did you mean to write wget version of socket interface? i.e. to write our version of socket, connect,write,read,close,bind, listen,accept,,,? sorry I'm confused. Yes! That's what I meant. (Except, we don't need listen, accept; and we only need bind

Re: About Automated Unit Test for Wget

2008-04-05 Thread Daniel Stenberg
On Sat, 5 Apr 2008, Hrvoje Niksic wrote: This would mean we'd need to separate uses of read() and write() on normal files (which should continue to use the real calls, until we replace them with the file I/O abstractions), from uses of read(), write(), etc on sockets, which would be using our

Re: About Automated Unit Test for Wget

2008-04-05 Thread Micah Cowan
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Daniel Stenberg wrote: On Sat, 5 Apr 2008, Micah Cowan wrote: Or did you mean to write wget version of socket interface? i.e. to write our version of socket, connect,write,read,close,bind, listen,accept,,,? sorry I'm confused. Yes! That's what

Re: About Automated Unit Test for Wget

2008-04-05 Thread Micah Cowan
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Daniel Stenberg wrote: In the curl project we took a simpler route: we have our own dumb test servers in the test suite to run tests against and we have single files that describe each test case: what the server should respond, what the protocol

Re: About Automated Unit Test for Wget

2008-04-05 Thread Micah Cowan
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hrvoje Niksic wrote: Micah Cowan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Or did you mean to write wget version of socket interface? i.e. to write our version of socket, connect,write,read,close,bind, listen,accept,,,? sorry I'm confused. Yes! That's what I