It is a very smart idea!
If we can implement an AutoLisp script that runs in AutoCad and that
generates an XML report of all of the DWG datastructures that compose a
certain DWG document, then we can ask for people to contribute complex DWG
files for us, and we would ask these people to run our AutoLisp script in
AutoCad so that each testcase would contain a complex DWG file and its
respective XML report file. That would make our testcases very robust and
with a wide coverage of the spec.

I am truly excited about this idea!

So, our focus in the testsuite effort now should be on defining who is
capable of implementing this AutoLisp script and start working on it.

Second step would be to implement a similar script that uses LibreDWG to
parse the DWG file and then generate an XML report of what LibreDWG can
understand of the file. Then, this LibreDWG report would be compared to the
testcase reference report in order to determine if we have passed the
testcase or not. This check could even try to highlight where the reports
diverge thus potentially making it explicit where a parsing bug is in the
code.

Thanks,
Felipe "Juca" Sanches

PS:
I think it could also be a VBA script instead, right?

On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 4:33 PM, Till Heuschmann
<[email protected]>wrote:

> Hi,
> I like your idea of an XML based TestSuite because it would give us the
> possibility to check all features of a drawing
> and not only the visible entities. Implementing an AutoLisp "entget" like
> function in LibreDWG would be a nice feature
> and a basis to generate the XML.
>
> One big disadvantage of the svg variant would even be the manual check
> which it implies...
>
> Regards
> Till
>
> Am 07.05.2010 20:03, schrieb Guruprasad Rane:
>
>  Hi All
>>
>> I have edited the wiki for TestSuite. Please have a look. Especially the
>> final section "XML based TestSuite". I would like you all to comment about
>> it.
>>
>> http://groups.fsf.org/wiki/LibreDWG/TestSuite
>>
>> Regards
>> Guruprasad
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>

Reply via email to