I haven't found that to be the case for the tests I have written for each suite, the output from testharness can be as simple as "PASS" or "FAIL", or include additional debug information defined by the test author. That being said, my experience is likely more limited than yours. Peter Linss, who wrote and maintains the W3C testharness, would likely be open to suggestions for improvement if there is anything specific that we want to change.
From: Maciej Stachowiak <m...@apple.com<mailto:m...@apple.com>> To: Jacob Goldstein <jac...@adobe.com<mailto:jac...@adobe.com>> Cc: WebKit Development <webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org<mailto:webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org>> Subject: Re: [webkit-dev] testharness Wiki page added On May 31, 2012, at 2:18 PM, Jacob Goldstein <jac...@adobe.com<mailto:jac...@adobe.com>> wrote: I added the following Wiki page to provide some information on testharness.js (the JavaScript framework from W3C recently landed in WebKit): http://trac.webkit.org/wiki/Writing%20testharness%20Tests I also updated the text under "Writing JavaScript-based DOM only test cases" on this page http://trac.webkit.org/wiki/Writing%20Layout%20Tests%20for%20DumpRenderTree. Note that I am recommending the use of testharness.js / testharnessreport.js over js-test-pre.js/js-test-post.js, when applicable, since tests written using testharness can be copied to the W3C test repository with only minor changes. Please review and send me any feedback on these pages. I am considering adding a detailed example to the testharness wiki page to demonstrate how the API should be used. In my experience, the W3C's DOM test harness results in tests that are more verbose, are less readable, and which have less readable output, as compared to js-test-pre.hs. I wish we would improve the W3C's upstream test harness instead of degrading the quality of our own tests. Regards, Maciej
_______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
