Hello,
Here are some further thoughts.
indexes
======
I also like the idea that you have good names for your indexes.
However, I'm only worried about them being hardcoded. The danger is
that if even the order of the modules is changed, the tests could
fail. What I was thinking was more along the lines of writing a
function that will find the index of the module based on its name.
This way you won't have to manually keep track of the indexes.
data location
==========
It's probably better if the unit tests and the demo have no
dependencies with each other. Currently the unit tests depend on demo
for the data. What you could do is to keep the data in a separate file
and include that into both pages. One possible solution would be to
have a js file that just sets that variable with the data.
- Justin
On 21-Aug-09, at 11:12 AM, Laurel A. Williams wrote:
(reposted to the list - accidentally sent this directly to Michelle
and forgot to cc the list)
Good to have your thoughts Michelle and I think you have solidified my
feelings on this too. There may be a little more I can do to ensure
that the tests don't get broken as easily. For instance, I should
probably add a warning comment to the data, reminding coders that
changing the data may impact the tests. I was also thinking that the
constants for the module indexes might be better placed next to the
data itself, rather than in the tests, so that if someone adds or
removes a module, the index values could be changed more readily.
Will await Justin's comments but am thinking that your reasoning may
win him over ;)
Also, on another note, you and I chatted way back about other things
I should change in builder.js. I put comment notes in the file to
remind me (line 23) - but now I can't remember for the life of me
what you or I meant, and Justin wasn't sure either from a quick
read. So maybe we could talk about that quickly today?? I suggest if
you have time to check the code out and look at it briefly maybe it
will jog your memory and then we can talk later (maybe 2:30'ish) in
the channel or if you are really busy a quick email would be fine
too. Recall that builder.js is the "demo" code that a developer
would add to their web page to use the customBuild component on
their website. The comments you made were about moving some code
from builder.js into the component.
Sorry for the last minute request...I only just realized I might
want to check in with you before you went away!
Laurel
[email protected] wrote:
Hi Laurel,
Good job on refactoring these tests. Please see my answer below.
Quoting "Laurel A. Williams" <[email protected]>:
As I was working with the tests, I noted that we reproduced the
exact
same data in the tests. I refactored to use only one copy of the
data,
but perhaps it was a case of "premature optimization".
Note though, since this is a piece of demo code, the
fluid.customBuild.demo.completeFluidInfusionData data does not
need to
change - it could stay the same even as infusion expands, since the
data for the 'live customBuilder' will always come from the
build.properties file and not from this data structure. However, I'm
thinking that people will be tempted to change the data as the real
infusion expands, in which case they will have to change the tests
to
reflect those changes...and some of the hard coding will be a pain
to
change.
I did try to address this somewhat by providing some constants for
the
indexes of the specific modules in the data which you wrote tests
around. In customBuild-tests.js you can find:
var INLINE_EDIT_INDEX = 7;
var PAGER_INDEX = 8;
var PROGRESS_INDEX = 9;
var REORDERER_INDEX = 10;
var UIOPTIONS_INDEX = 12;
So, I think that outlines all of the details around this data
structure...what do you think...should it simply be duplicated in
both
the tests and the demo to prevent people from breaking the tests
inadvertently? I'm not convinced, but honestly don't think it is
critical one way or the other.
I think it would be best to have a single copy of the demo data and
have the tests run against that. It's true that if someone updates
the demo data the tests may break, however, that might be a good
thing. If we at some point change the structure of the data, not
just the content, we would want the tests to break. It is more
likely that someone will update the demo data rather then the test
data in this case.
Also, as you said, I don't feel there is any need to update the
demo data when new modules are added. Unless of course the pattern
of the additional module is different - a special case. In that
case, we'd want the test data updated anyway because we would need
to write a new test.
As someone coming into these tests cold, I actually like the named
indexes because it makes it clear to me in the test what is being
tested. It's easier for me to look in the data for 'pager' rather
then index 8.
Hope this helps,
Michelle
<
laurel_williams
.vcf>_______________________________________________________
fluid-work mailing list - [email protected]
To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives,
see http://fluidproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fluid-work
_______________________________________________________
fluid-work mailing list - [email protected]
To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives,
see http://fluidproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fluid-work
