Dirk, On Sat, 2013-07-27 at 13:30 +0200, Dirk Bächle wrote: […] > I think this would require a definition of what exactly entails the term > "right paradigm". Also, calling for an "easier way" instinctively makes > me ask: "For the users, or the developers?".
I think "user" and "developer" here is possibly a less important distinction that in other situations since the developers are you and whoever writing Python code, and the users are Python programmers writing Python code. > As long as there is a way to run tests for out-of-core Tools, and it's > documented and reproducible for the user, it feels "right" to me. > > If you can think of a more advanced setup, or would like to talk about > what exactly is annoying you, let's discuss it. My irritant here is that the test SConstruct is not the same as would be used in a real project. Given all SCons tests are effectively system tests, I tend to prefer the code of the test being exactly the code the "end user" (as in the person developing the project using SCons as build tool). If the test framework always added '.' to the tool search path when the -e option was present then I suspect that it would get around my problem. -- Russel. ============================================================================= Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:russel.win...@ekiga.net 41 Buckmaster Road m: +44 7770 465 077 xmpp: rus...@winder.org.uk London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk skype: russel_winder
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Scons-dev mailing list Scons-dev@scons.org http://two.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
