On Tue, 29 Jun 2021 14:05:04 +0200 Kristian Amlie <krist...@amlie.name> wrote:
>On 27.06.2021 19:40, Ichthyostega wrote: >> >> Hi Will, >> Hi Kristian, >> >> as you've probably guessed already, I was rather busy last week with my >> work >> job; but this weekend I was able to continue with the test feature. >> There are >> still those two unclear issues, and as I explained last week, for now we >> can >> work around those with some additional initialisation before starting >> the test. >> So I've focussed primarily on rounding up the changes done thus far. All >> the >> parameters of this built-in test functions are now exposed to CLI, together >> with proper max/min/default values and help text. Also I've refined the >> timing measurement to include only the noteOn|Off and MasterAudio calls, >> but not the SynthEngine::shutUp() we need to send before each test note >> to clear out the effect chain. >> >> Am 31.05.21 um 20:12 schrieb Will Godfrey: >>> When you have the new code stabilised enough can you put some info in >>> dev_notes please? >> I will look into that next. >> Yet the next major step for me is to set up a testing infrastructure >> with some kind of test runner. I've already spent some time on further >> planning -- probably it's best I'll do a prototype as proposal and >> starting point for further discussion (and a prototype can always >> be thrown away and re-done in any ways we see fit). >> >> I will start that within a new and separate Git repository, because >> the way we've approached the testing, a test runner does not need to >> link directly against Yoshimi code; all it will need is a Yoshimi >> executable to launch the low-level tests via CLI and (as second step) >> a Yoshimi-LV2 plugin to launch high-level integration tests. >> >> IMHO, keeping the test suite cleanly separated, while using the real >> executable is a bonus; we can keep the test suite separate and also be more >> flexible with experimenting and evolving the test suite. Eg. we could check >> the baseline WAV files into that separate Git repository as a starting >> point, >> and just see where this leads. > >Sounds good. Another advantage is that with many WAV test files, the >repository might grow to a considerable size, and it's nice not to have >to carry that weight in the main repository. > >> Regarding the language I'm leaning towards "the most simple thing" for our >> project, which IMHO is to implement it in C++ and using libSOX for >> processing >> the samples and detecting differences. Basically we could use Boost-test >> for running the testsuite. However, while I am quite fond of Boost-test, >> what we do here is rather special and I don't see any gain from pulling >> in /any/ library or /testing framework/. Thus I'd rather just implement >> it from scratch, it is a simple programming task after all, and we >> do not need any bangs and whistles, like fancy formatted XML reports >> or instrumentation and Mocks and code coverage metrics and the like. > >+1 Yes several good points here. Apart from anything else, Boost is not supported in some (all?) BSDs, and Yoshimi is BSD friendly. We have a handful of happy users over there. A separate repository also seems a good idea. Yoshimi is definitely developing middle age spread :) I would suggest copies on both github and sourceforge. Wearing my tinfoil hat, I don't completely trust either, and with the main repository independently (but at the same time) push master commits to both. -- Will J Godfrey https://willgodfrey.bandcamp.com/ http://yoshimi.github.io Say you have a poem and I have a tune. Exchange them and we can both have a poem, a tune, and a song. _______________________________________________ Yoshimi-devel mailing list Yoshimi-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/yoshimi-devel
