Hello Robert, and thanks for the feedback. On Sunday 20 March 2011, Robert Collins wrote: > On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 1:03 PM, Stefano Lattarini > <stefano.lattar...@gmail.com> wrote: > > ABSTRACT: > > > > The Test Anything Protocol (TAP) is a simple text-based protocol > > that allows communication between test scripts and a test harness. > ... > > Now, in all honesty, I must say that I've chosen TAP not only for its > > objective qualities and merits, but also because I have some previous > > knowledge of it (which allowed me to present a more concrete proposal > > and a meaningful roadmap) and I personally like it (which will probably > > be a powerful motivator to overcome the unavoidable hurdles I'll > > encounter down the road). > > > > Still, there might be very valid competing alternatives to TAP out there, > > which I might not know about, but that in the long run would offer > > Automake more advantages and interoperabilty, thus outweighting the two > > "personal" advantages of TAP I've reported above. So, if anyone who's > > reading this has proposals about viable alternatives to TAP, please > > speak up -- your contribution is appreciated! > > TAP is an extremely simple protocol, and the extensions to it to > support things like not needing to maintain the count of tests, > additional debug data and so on are pretty rudimentary. subunit, which > I've mentioned before was written after TAP, to solve similar problems > and address the issues in TAP itself. > > While the users of a protocol aren't really an indicator of the > protocols worth, projects as large as samba are using subunit. > > Unlike TAP subunit supports attachments (binary and text) to tests, > test naming, tagging, timestamping (permitting robust timing data even > in parallelised or distributed testing). > Is there some document that describes the subunit features in depth *and* with examples? I mean something similar to what the following is for TAP: <http://search.cpan.org/~petdance/Test-Harness/lib/Test/Harness/TAP.pod> That would be very useful to do a proper comparison, and weight advantages and disadvatnages.
> Integrating with TAP is basically uninteresting to anyone working in a > high level language: Python, Ruby,Java, C++ etc. > How so? (honest question) > -Rob > Thanks, Stefano
