A combination of RUnit from CRAN and .Rbuildignore provide a workable solution for the 'xts' package I work on, though this obviously removes the tests from the distributed code.
http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/RUnit/index.html --and-- http://wiki.r-project.org/rwiki/doku.php?id=developers:runit Jeff On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 10:05 AM, Kevin R. Coombes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > I recently provoked some discussion over on the BioConductor developer list > about testing and R CMD check. In brief, the salient points that arose from > the discussion are: > > [1] Because of the need for a nightly build of BioConductor, the tests (in > the ./tests directory) of a package that run routinely as part of "R CMD > check" must complete in five minutes. > [2] Nontrivial regression testing of complex algorithms on real data can > easily take longer than five minutes. > [3] Maintaining and improving code that works on various kinds of "omics" > data is greatly facilitated by the inclusion of nontrivial regression tests. > > Of course, points [1] and [3] are incompatible in the current setup. Both > could, however, be accommodated by changing the way "R CMD check" runs test > scripts. There are at least two ways this could be accomplished. > > One possibility would be to define a separate directory as part of the > package structure to store the more complex, longer, "deep" tests. That is, > one might have > package/R > package/man > package/tests > package/deeptests [or some better name] > Then the default for "R CMD check" would be to run all the .R scripts in > tests but none of the .R scripts in deep tests. However, one would also have > to add an option, perhaps something like > R CMD check --run-deeptests [package] > to run the more elaborate test scripts. > > The second possibility would be to keep all the tests in the same (existing > ./tests) directory but include a standard file in that directory to indicate > which scripts are more complex. This would be a little trickier to design, > since it would be nice to keep the existing behavior for someone who ignores > the new structure. One, could however, allow for something like > > ---------------------------- > ## CONTROLTESTS > > complex: test1.R, test3.R > simple: test2.R, test4.R > ----------------------------- > > The default (in the absence of A CONTROLTESTS file or for scripts in the > directory that are not listed in the file) is to assume "simple", which > would then get the existing behavior without changes to existing packages. > > How hard would it be to implement one of these approaches for R CMD check? > > -- Kevin > > ______________________________________________ > R-devel@r-project.org mailing list > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel > -- There's a way to do it better - find it. Thomas A. Edison ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel