Mehmet Tekman writes: >> P.S. There going to be Emacs meetup this Saturday, July 22 >> (https://emacs-apac.gitlab.io/announcements/july-2023/). I plan to be >> there and, if you need it, we can try to resolve difficulties in more >> interactive way. > > I am currently travelling this weekend, otherwise I happily would > attend so that this patch could speed forward. Next month maybe? Another meetup is on July 26. https://emacs-berlin.org/ Or we can arrange a jitsi call. >> Side note: You are re-implementing the already available ERT >> features for failed test reporting. Instead of controlling >> which tests failed manually, you should better follow the >> example of all other tests and simply use a sequence of >> `should'/`should-not' forms. > > Okay, I've re-written this to conform to the `should' macros. I > *really* wish these macros could be named so that I could debug > failing statements better, but for now numbering them in the > comments and using the `l' binding works well enough for > debugging. To name them, you can use separate ert-deftest statements. Also, see the attached modified version of your diff - I made it so that `should' failures immediately provide some clue about expected result value, that can help to identify which of the should clauses fails. > I have two tests that I've set to "should-not" pass for now, but > once the correct merging behaviour has been implemented, I > believe that I will change them to "should" pass statements: > > - 9. do-not-tangle-this-block > - 12. tangle-file-with-spaces The tests are indeed not passing on vanilla Org. I assume that you tested them with your other patch applied.