Re: [Chicken-users] Unit testing

[Kon Lovett]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Nov 17, 2006, at 3:37 PM, Alejandro Forero Cuervo wrote:

> I'm thinking of documenting some unofficial procedure for generating
> unit tests for all our eggs (and for Chicken itself).  It would
> probably be integrated with the wiki (allowing anyone to submit new
> tests) but it would be "safe", in the sense that whatever gets added
> to the wiki needs to be "approved" by a regular svn-repos user before
> it gets added to the real suite.
>
> I'm having trouble selecting which test egg to use.  I see there are
> three but all seem to be very limited for what I want to do.  I expect
> my testing mechanism to be able to specify limits for the execution of
> each test.  I also expect it to be robust enough to keep a crash or
> infinite loop during one test from crashing/hanging the whole test
> environment.  On a quick look at our testing eggs, it seems none
> fits my requirements.

Please elaborate on "specify limits for the execution".

As far as "crash" proof goes, that will require something that traps  
memory exceptions, etc. None of the existing 3 support this.

Also requires a test results storage system that is incremental,  
transactional, & probably external. "test-infrastructure" constructs  
its' results in a functional manner, "check" is incremental but not  
safe, & "testeez" is incremental but not safe.

"test-infrastructure" is exception safe but "testeez" & "check" are not.

An infinite loop can be protected against by running tests in  
separate threads. Unfortunately "test-infrastructure" is not thread- 
safe (it has some global variables - which could be moved to some  
state object), "testeez" is thread-safe, & "check" has global variables.

I do maintain "test-infrastructure" but am not the author. Think I  
will make the necessary thread-safety changes.

> Hence, my question: is anyone of the maintainers of the test eggs
> willing to extend them to support these requirements (or am I wrong
> and does some of our eggs indeed support this)?  If not, I'll probably
> start a new one from scratch and use it.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Alejo.
> http://azul.freaks-unidos.net/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Chicken-users mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)

iEYEARECAAYFAkVeW5kACgkQJJNoeGe+5O4m8gCdG7sxqdkUTDk1ivUxtdNF9LoB
DQoAnj7YGrr6kYm9VH2b27tw2SGgRiTQ
=hUIZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----