> On May 8, 2017, at 10:42 PM, youenn fablet <youe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> testharness.js does not need an http server. Some WPT goodies need the WPT 
> server.

I misunderstood since we were also discussing:

>> To continue moving forward, some of us are proposing to serve all tests in 
>> LayoutTests/wpt through the WPT server [1].

I think if somebody is writing a testharness.js test and it does *not* require 
the WPT server, it should be tested as a file URL.

This would imply putting it outside of LayoutTests/wpt though, right?

> I agree different frameworks offer different benefits. There is no reason we 
> should mandate one framework in particular.

Let me make it even more clear what I'm trying to defend. An ad-hoc custom test 
that uses no "framework" but is entirely self contained.

> In case there is no specific needs, it makes sense to me to recommend using 
> testharness.js, at least for those hacking WebCore.

I think it's valuable for engineers to be aware of the "frameworks" like 
testharness.js and js-test, and familiar with the facilities they provide, but 
to not necessarily imply that using any framework is expected.

 Brady
webkit-dev mailing list

Reply via email to