Moin, On Sunday 23 April 2006 23:08, Shlomi Fish wrote: > On Sunday 23 April 2006 23:11, chromatic wrote: > > On Sunday 23 April 2006 12:46, Shlomi Fish wrote: > > > I agree that a well-defined test output protocol is useful. > > > However, are you implying that assuming we have that, one can write > > > several different test harnesses to process such test outputs? (I'm > > > just guessing.) > I see. Well the final conclusion remains the same: we still need a good > test harness that we should be able to customise using roles, > subclasses, plug-ins or whatever. > > I still don't see where the well-definition of the test output protocol > has anything to do with this issue. How would a well-defined test > output protocol help with making the test harness customisable?
Because instead of ever-changing text output (in various formatting), you might have XML (or whatever), that is transformed for output. Then you can have it display %, or not, in color or not, or in HTML or whatever. The current screenscraping really really has problems everytime the output changes. Best wishes, Tels -- Signed on Mon Apr 24 00:08:25 2006 with key 0x93B84C15. Visit my photo gallery at http://bloodgate.com/photos/ PGP key on http://bloodgate.com/tels.asc or per email. "Any sufficiently rigged demo is indistinguishable from an advanced technology." -- Don Quixote, slashdot guy
pgpS5dgnXQ9tz.pgp
Description: PGP signature
