2008/4/5, Micah Cowan [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Daniel Stenberg wrote:
This system allows us to write unit-tests if we'd like to, but mostly so
far we've focused to test it system-wide. It is hard enough for us!
Yeah, I thought I'd seen
2008/4/5, Micah Cowan [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Daniel Stenberg wrote:
This system allows us to write unit-tests if we'd like to, but mostly so
far we've focused to test it system-wide. It is hard enough for us!
Yeah, I thought I'd seen
Micah Cowan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't see what you see wrt making the code harder to follow and reason
about (true abstraction rarely does, AFAICT,
I was referring to the fact that adding an abstraction layer requires
learning about the abstraction layer, both its concepts and its
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Micah Cowan wrote:
Yeah. But we're not doing streaming. And you still haven't given much
explanation for _why_ it's as hard and time-consuming as you say. Making
a claim and demonstrating it are different things, I think.
To be clear, I'm not
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
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
-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
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
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
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
-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
-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
-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
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Yoshihiro Tanaka wrote:
Hello, I want to ask about Unit test of Wget in the future.
I want to ask about unit test.
Now unit test of Wget is written only for following .c files.
-- http.c init.c main.c res.c url.c utils.c (test.c)
So as
14 matches
Mail list logo
