-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 26
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Issues related to test scripts #458
Comments
I don't know what you mean by that. Have you read the documentation in |
Using a Makefile. The script will call |
|
I don't find this an adequate solution. If one test needs to be different (that is, use a compiler flag), then I need to write a Makefile for all of the tests in that directory. This kind of defeats the purpose of having the testing script. My suggestion is to add a |
I read the documentation for
|
I had already edited my original question. I already have a local fix for that. |
You don't need to write a Makefile for all of the tests. Just for the one. Makefiles are what was there before and I chose to reuse them in the interest of keeping this task manageable. A That being said, a |
Firstly, it is good that I can used the Makefile and other individual tests. Secondly, I have a Makefile of 31 lines that I need to maintain just so that I don't want to make this an onerous task. I just want one coherent test framework. Mostly, you have produced such a thing. It is only now when I test it out that I see what features I need that I didn't realise I needed. |
Can I see that Makefile? |
|
Compare to the
|
5 lines. With the
|
Anyway, I'll take care of the show stoppers that you've found and delegate the Makefile question to a new issue. |
Can you indicate which ones you do take care of, and I will create an issue for each of the others that remains a problem? |
Yes, I'll do that with the PR that I should be ready with in the next hour or so. |
This discussion led me to look closer at the Makefiles. Most can go :) Will be included in the next PR. |
It would be interesting to understand why the Makefiles that need to stay need to stay. |
The one in modules is the only one left. It uses the -I flag. |
Fixed in #463. |
Issues testing framework:
typesyn
directory can be removed.enc
file without a corresponding.out
file, it simply prints the name of the file, and continues. It does not run treat it as a test, which is fine, but it does not say what it has done with the file. The output is exactly the same as for a test that runs and succeeds.where there is no such thing as rubbish, I get
It would be preferable to have it say that no tests were found.
in the middle of testing.
.fail
file causes a test to pass, irregardless of the actual status. This case seems wrong -- error-prone, and should be detected.>>> FAILED TEST: Qualified.FAILED:
in the test output.Specifically, why
.FAILED
not.enc
?encore/modules/InfiniteImport.enc
that I want to run. But this doesn't work:Actually, it is not clear whether or not the test has been run.
make test
cleaned up and remade the compiler before running the tests. This behaviour should be preserved.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: