Re: Re: Test framework needed

["Eric Schulte" <schulte.eric@gmail.com>]

Rainer M Krug <r.m.krug@gmail.com> writes:

> On 30/03/11 16:18, Christian Egli wrote:
>> Rainer M Krug <r.m.krug@gmail.com> writes:
>> 
>>>> http://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/UnitTesting
>>>
>>> Am I right in assuming, that all of the possible test frameworks would
>>> require org files and the expected output (tengle, export to ...,
>>> agenda, ...)? In this case, would it make sense to start collecting
>>> those, as they can easily be user contributed, consequently representing
>>> a cross section of the use cases (even not intended use cases)?
>> 
>> Before you go too far with this; Orgmode already contains a unit test
>> suite. Look at the README in the testing directory
>> (http://orgmode.org/w/?p=org-mode.git;a=blob_plain;f=testing/README.org;hb=HEAD)
>> 
>
> But it does not look as if it is used very often... There are not many
> test org files, and I did not se anything which compares the resulting
> exported / tangle  file with an expected output?
>
> Please correct me if I am missing something.
>

You are correct that the existing test suite needs some attention and
some more tests.  Just a general commitment to convert problem reports
from the mailing list into unit tests should be a step in the right
direction.

However the existing test suite (while under populated) is the result of
multiple previous discussion of this nature on the mailing list, and I
think that abandoning the existing infrastructure would be a step in the
wrong direction.

>
> This suite should actually be updated with effectively each patch which
> introduces new features and run after each patch.
>

Agreed, in a perfect world...

>
> So is it only necessary to add meat to this framework?
>

Yes, I believe the best way forward would be to add tests to the
existing framework.

Best -- Eric

>
> Rainer