dmd testsuite naming scheme
SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org
Tue Jan 3 11:18:32 PST 2012
On 1/3/12 12:57 PM, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
> On 03-01-2012 16:44, Martin Nowak wrote:
>> On Tue, 03 Jan 2012 15:39:34 +0100, Alex Rønne Petersen
>> <xtzgzorex at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 03-01-2012 13:36, Trass3r wrote:
>>>>>> I honestly wouldn't know where to add or search for a test case.
>>>>> It doesn't really matter where they go. A collection of test cases
>>>>> with a theme to them might go in a named file, a random one might be
>>>>> appended to any of the test* files.
>>>> Won't this potentially lead to test duplication?
>>>> Considering that the testsuite already takes quite some time to run
>>>> isn't a desirable trend imho.
>>> Test duplication isn't necessarily a bad thing. In my experience, it
>>> often happens that a tiny difference between two seemingly equal tests
>>> can be all that matters.
>>> On the other hand, grouping tests into files based on language
>>> features might be a good idea. If anything, to be able to navigate the
>>> test suite.
>>> - Alex
>> There is some opportunity in creating systematic feature tests backed
>> with coverage analysis. There are still too many uncovered areas.
>> This not only helps to find remaining bugs but gives a specification
>> like overview of a feature state.
> I still say D needs a formal specification more than a test suite as
> some kind of excuse for a specification. (And no, I don't consider
> d-p-l.org a spec; a guide at best.)
> - Alex
More information about the Digitalmars-d