On 6/4/2014 1:20 PM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: > The other thing that you need to note is that there is years of > experience behind each one of our test frameworks, and there are > probably several hundred thousand lines of code written against any of > them. And there are many many people who have been using these > frameworks for years now. Completely replacing the testing API is > pretty much as major a change as one could possibly imagine. This is > not a gradual change in any way.
I think you're giving far too much credit to the "years of experience" bit. Most of our test harnesses were scavenged from somewhere else and have a pile of hacks built on top of that. The inconsistency between our various test harnesses makes it harder than necessary to write different types of tests. I think everyone can agree that consistency there is a worthy goal. Is the CommonJS assert module the perfect test assertion API? Almost certainly not, but the main advantage is that it's had *some* API design applied to it, vs. the organic growth into a monstrosity that we currently have in our test suites. It seems like a net positive change to me. Changing the entire world in one fell swoop is a huge undertaking. We've attempted to do something like this in other situations, like using SpecialPowers to make tests e10s-friendly, and it's really hard. I don't think any change ought to be blocked on that. RE: the discussion of testharness.js etc, I think those are even farther afield, since the testing model there is much different from what we have in Mochitest/xpcshell tests. It makes sense to align our web content tests with W3C testing, since that means we can share tests with other browser vendors, but we still have a huge existing base of Mochitests that aren't going to get ported to that style anytime soon. -Ted _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
