On Wed, 20 Nov 2002 19:59:56 +0000, Dave Whipp wrote:
> I was wondering when someone would bring that up (someone always
> does). Extensibility doesn't matter: the code generator's specific purpose
> is to generate tests of numeric literals. If that isn't what you want, use
> a different generator; or just stick with hand-coding.
Where would you like to generate the test files? Would it be part of the
standard 'make' target? Would it happen at the start of 'make test'? Would we
do it before checking the test files into source control?
> For each family of tests, I think the correct approach is to start by
> writing the test-code manually. But as soon as abstractions become
> apparent, a session of refactoring can make the tests much more
> readable and maintainable.
Agreed. If there are idioms that must be repeated in tests, we should abstract
them and add them to our testing tools.
My concerns are these:
- write tests
- make and keep it easy for people to add tests
- maintain the proper test progression (test features before using them in the
testing tools)
Any approach that respects those goals is fine by me.
-- c
