Just curious, would it be less maintenance if the test run was integrated with run-webkit-tests?/Is the concern about having lots of different tests harness to run to verify a change?
dave On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 12:11 PM, James Robinson <jam...@google.com> wrote: > As a concrete example, I found this test setup helpful for this patch: > http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/58345. A nice side effect was that it > revealed a bug in CodeGeneratorGObject.pm and let me fix it without having > to set up build setup for whatever it is that uses the GObject bindings. > > I agree that golden file testing is a very high-maintenance fragile test > method, but it's better than nothing. If this framework didn't exist then I > would have likely made the change and relied on spot checking and our > existing automated tests to catch any regressions which is less than ideal. > > - James > > On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 11:44 AM, Ojan Vafai <o...@chromium.org> wrote: > >> On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 11:39 AM, Alexey Proskuryakov <a...@webkit.org>wrote: >> >>> On 29.04.2010, at 11:17, Yaar Schnitman wrote: >>> >>>> I've been using the tool for a couple of patches in V8. It really boost >>>> the development cycle, helps reviewers understanding what a cryptic perl >>>> block of code actually does, and side effects are easy to find. Once you >>>> start using it, its becoming hard to work without it. Give it a try! >>>> >>> >>> 'm thinking about how this tool could have helped with the CodeGenerator >>> changes I made in the past, and it seems that it wouldn't have detected any >>> changes, and could require me to find creative ways to test the new >>> behavior. >> >> >> I don't really follow the what the maintenance overhead is. How does this >> actually cause you more than a trivial amount of extra work? Maybe a >> specific example would help. >> >> Isn't this just like having a layout test with expected results? It's a >> small isolated test instead of testing everything. That seems like a good >> thing. >> >> More importantly, it lets you be sure that every feature of the code >> generator has some testing. In the real IDLs, a feature might stop getting >> used temporarily and then changes to the code generator would not be readily >> apparent. >> >> Ojan >> >> P.S. Sorry for the double-post some of you got. Sent from the wrong email >> address at first. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> webkit-dev mailing list >> webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org >> http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > webkit-dev mailing list > webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org > http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev > >
_______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
