|
| From: | Richard Shann |
| Subject: | Re: [Denemo-devel] Master is badly broken |
| Date: | Tue, 15 Jul 2014 13:54:59 +0100 |
On Sun, 2014-07-13 at 21:13 +0200, Éloi Rivard wrote:
> Do you think the test suite is mature enough to let met merge my
> "refactor" branch ?
I thought where we had got to was that the test framework is now working
in the sense that my separate user when running make check gets a pass.
But, AFAIK we only have a couple of tests ...
The next step is to see if we can create tests.
I thought the plan was that each time a command script was written a
denemo file with a script in it would be written that exercises the new
command with success measured by the file remaining unaltered after
loading (and hence running the embedded script). That is, by placing
self-testing (idempotent) denemo files in a suitable directory
(fixtures? - can we create a hierarchy of files below fixtures and will
they all be loaded and saved and tested for change?)
I also thought there was a naming convention for the case where
a .denemo file is not idempotent, that is a output file for comparison,
together with a make target that accepts a different output file as the
new comparison file to be used when the output file format has been
changed.
Richard
>
>
>
> 2014-07-13 21:10 GMT+02:00 Éloi Rivard <address@hidden>:
> The test framework is the glib one.
> https://developer.gnome.org/glib/stable/glib-Testing.html
>
>
> To add a test, open integration.c or unit.c (the one you think
> fits the most)
>
> Create a test function, for instance
> test_foobar(gpointer fixture, gconstpointer data)
>
>
> and register it in the main function
> g_test_add ("/THE_EXE_NAME/foobar", void, NULL, setup,
> test_foobar, teardown);
>
>
>
> 2014-07-13 18:49 GMT+02:00 Richard Shann
> <address@hidden>:
>
> On Sun, 2014-07-13 at 15:03 +0200, Éloi Rivard wrote:
> > Ok. So if you run make check or/and make distcheck,
> does it pass ?
>
>
> yes, it ends with
>
> OK
> PASS: unit
> ==================
> All 2 tests passed
> ==================
>
> after running make check. Does this mean we are in a
> position to write
> more tests that will reliably pass? What would be the
> procedure to do
> that?
>
> Richard
>
> >
> >
> >
> > 2014-07-13 14:32 GMT+02:00 Richard Shann
> <address@hidden>:
> > On Sun, 2014-07-13 at 14:12 +0200, Éloi
> Rivard wrote:
> > > Can you checkout the last git code, "make
> && cd tests &&
> > make unit &&
> > > gtester -p=/unit/thumbnailer unit &&
> cd .." and dump me the
> > full log,
> > > with the lilypond output ?
> >
> >
> > I did this, and it ended with a PASS, (as
> below), but I don't
> > see
> > anything labelled log, or any lilypond
> output...
> >
> > [...]
> > ;;;
> >
> compiled
> /home/denemo-user/.cache/guile/ccache/2.0-LE-8-2.0/home/denemo-user/denemo-git/actions/denemo-modules/wysiwyg.scm.go
> > Denemo - MESSAGE : Opening
> >
> file
> /home/denemo-user/denemo-git/tests/fixtures/denemo/blank.denemo
> >
> > Denemo - INFO : Attempt to create
> >
> thumbnail /home/denemo-user/denemo-git/tests/tmp/thumbnail.png
> > Denemo - INFO : Thumbnail generated
> >
> at /home/denemo-user/denemo-git/tests/tmp/thumbnail.png
> > Denemo - INFO : Large thumbnail generated
> >
> at /home/denemo-user/denemo-git/tests/tmp/thumbnail.png
> > PASS: unit
> >
> > Richard
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 2014-06-25 9:28 GMT+02:00 Richard Shann
> > <address@hidden>:
> > > I configured with --enable-debug
> and did make
> > > and then
> > > cd tests && gtester
> -p=/unit/thumbnailer unit &&
> > cd ..
> > >
> > > and this completed successfully,
> the tail of the
> > output is
> > > below.
> > > So it would seem that this test is
> faulty -
> > sometimes it
> > > passes and
> > > sometimes not. I can see a
> potential problem with it
> > - the
> > > command
> > > (d-CreateThumbnail #f) is perhaps
> the one that
> > creates a
> > > LilyPond
> > > process without waiting for it to
> finish (when
> > exiting denemo
> > > this is
> > > what happens I think). If the test
> is looking for
> > the output
> > > file from
> > > the LilyPond process then that may
> not have finished
> > by the
> > > time the
> > > test checks. Just a thought.
> > >
> > > Richard
> > >
> > >
> > > [...]
> > > Denemo - DEBUG : Executing
> '(d-CreateThumbnail #f
> > >
> >
>
> "/home/rshann/git-denemo/denemo/tests/tmp/thumbnail.png")(d-Exit)'
> > > Denemo - INFO : Creating
> > >
> >
> thumbnail
> /home/rshann/git-denemo/denemo/tests/tmp/thumbnail.png
> > > Denemo - DEBUG :
> > >
> Generating /tmp/Denemo9Sr0Ug/denemothumb.png from
> > > Lilypond
> > > PASS: unit
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, 2014-06-25 at 00:16 +0200,
> Éloi Rivard
> > wrote:
> > > > Ok, you should be able to launch
> the failing test
> > with :
> > > >
> > > > cd tests
> > > > gtester -p=/unit/thumbnailer
> unit
> > > > You should probably configure
> with --enable-debug
> > to see
> > > debug
> > > > messages, if you did not
> > > >
> > > > > Denemo - CRITICAL: Thumbnail
> 128x128
> > > >
> file /tmp/Denemo2g5UiI/denemothumb.
> > > > png gave an error: Failed to
> open file
> > > >
> '/tmp/Denemo2g5UiI/denemothumb.png': No such file
> > or
> > > directory
> > > > > Denemo - CRITICAL: Thumbnail
> 256x256
> > > >
> file /tmp/Denemo2g5UiI/denemothumb.png gave an
> > error: Failed
> > > to open
> > > > file
> '/tmp/Denemo2g5UiI/denemothumb.png': No such
> > file or
> > > directory
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Those two error messages you get
> seem to come from
> > > thumb_finished in
> > > > printview/printview.c, because
> the
> > create_thumbnail did not
> > > ran
> > > > properly…
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 2014-06-16 19:06 GMT+02:00
> Richard Shann
> > > <address@hidden>:
> > > > gtester --version
> > > > gtester version 2.32.4
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, 2014-06-16 at
> 17:46 +0200, Éloi
> > Rivard
> > > wrote:
> > > > > What is you gtester
> version ?
> > > > > gtester --version
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > 2014-06-16 17:00 GMT
> +02:00 Richard Shann
> > > >
> <address@hidden>:
> > > > > On Mon,
> 2014-06-16 at 15:15
> > +0200, Éloi
> > > Rivard
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > Logs are in
> the "tests" dir.
> > There are
> > > several
> > > > ones
> > > > >
> (integration.log
> > > > > > for
> integration test, unit.log
> > for unit
> > > test etc.)
> > > > >
> > > > > I have nothing
> that looks like a
> > log file
> > > in the
> > > > tests
> > > > > directory
> after
> > > > > running the
> tests as I
> > described:
> > > > > ls -lrt
> > > > > total 304
> > > > > drwxr-xr-x 2
> denemo-user
> > denemo-user 4096
> > > Jun 16
> > > > 07:14
> > > > >
> integration-tmp
> > > > > drwxr-xr-x 4
> denemo-user
> > denemo-user 4096
> > > Jun 16
> > > > 07:25
> > > > > Interactive
> > > > > -rw-r--r-- 1
> denemo-user
> > denemo-user 949
> > > Jun 16
> > > > 07:25
> > > > > README.md
> > > > > -rw-r--r-- 1
> denemo-user
> > denemo-user 316
> > > Jun 16
> > > > 07:25
> > > > > Makefile.am
> > > > > -rw-r--r-- 1
> denemo-user
> > denemo-user 302
> > > Jun 16
> > > > 07:25
> > > > > common.h
> > > > > -rw-r--r-- 1
> denemo-user
> > denemo-user 779
> > > Jun 16
> > > > 07:25
> > > > > common.c
> > > > > -rw-r--r-- 1
> denemo-user
> > denemo-user 4502
> > > Jun 16
> > > > 07:25 unit.c
> > > > > -rw-r--r-- 1
> denemo-user
> > denemo-user 8211
> > > Jun 16
> > > > 07:25
> > > > > integration.c
> > > > > drwxr-xr-x 5
> denemo-user
> > denemo-user 4096
> > > Jun 16
> > > > 07:25
> > > > > fixtures
> > > > > -rw-r--r-- 1
> denemo-user
> > denemo-user 40068
> > > Jun 16
> > > > 08:37
> > > > > Makefile.in
> > > > > -rw-r--r-- 1
> denemo-user
> > denemo-user 42423
> > > Jun 16
> > > > 08:37
> > > > > Makefile
> > > > > -rw-r--r-- 1
> denemo-user
> > denemo-user 53856
> > > Jun 16
> > > > 08:38
> > > > > integration.o
> > > > > -rw-r--r-- 1
> denemo-user
> > denemo-user 9992
> > > Jun 16
> > > > 08:38
> > > > > common.o
> > > > > -rwxr-xr-x 1
> denemo-user
> > denemo-user 37567
> > > Jun 16
> > > > 08:38
> > > > > integration
> > > > > -rw-r--r-- 1
> denemo-user
> > denemo-user 29888
> > > Jun 16
> > > > 08:38 unit.o
> > > > > -rwxr-xr-x 1
> denemo-user
> > denemo-user 28066
> > > Jun 16
> > > > 08:38 unit
> > > > > drwxr-xr-x 2
> denemo-user
> > denemo-user 4096
> > > Jun 16
> > > > 08:38 tmp
> > > > >
> > > > > Richard
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2014-06-16
> 15:14 GMT+02:00
> > Éloi Rivard
> > > > <address@hidden>:
> > > > > > Ok
> it seems that you
> > have an
> > > issue with
> > > > the
> > > > > thumbnailer
> test,
> > > > > > I
> look at this asap.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
>
> > > > > >
> 2014-06-16 12:05 GMT
> > +02:00
> > > Richard Shann
> > > > > >
> > <address@hidden>:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> On Sun,
> > 2014-06-15 at
> > > 12:53 +0200,
> > > > Éloi
> > > > > Rivard wrote:
> > > > > >
> > Do you think
> > the
> > > testsuite is
> > > > tough enough
> > > > > to merge
> > > > > >
> the "refactor"
> > > > > >
> > branch now ?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> We seem to be
> > so close,
> > > ready to
> > > > write at
> > > > > least one or
> > > > > >
> two tests, but
> > I
> > > > > >
> can't get make
> > -C tests
> > > check to
> > > > work (see
> > > > > below).
> > > > > >
> Also, you said
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > I
> > create a
> > > new test
> > > > that will
> > > > > try to
> > > > > >
> execute every
> > not
> > > > > >
> >
> > builtin scheme
> > > > > >
> > >
> > command
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> is this
> > actually
> > > happening?, and
> > > > if so does
> > > > > it execute
> > > > > >
> the command on
> > > > > >
> blank file
> > (very weak)
> > > rather than
> > > > a file
> > > > > with music
> > > > > >
> in it - that
> > would
> > > > > >
> be a small
> > change that
> > > would make
> > > > the test
> > > > > far
> > > > > >
> stronger...
> > > > > >
> I started
> > trying to
> > > create a test
> > > > for each
> > > > > new
> > > > > >
> command, but I
> > don't
> > > have
> > > > > >
> a method for
> > creating
> > > tests that
> > > > work.
> > > > > >
> To run the
> > tests I have
> > > a separate
> > > > user with
> > > > > user name
> > > > > >
> "denemo-user".
> > I
> > > > > >
> don't see any
> > log file
> > > at the end
> > > > of the
> > > > > tests or
> > > > > >
> details of
> > what
> > > > > >
> failed, I'll
> > paste here
> > > what I see
> > > > - it ends
> > > > > with 1 of
> > > > > >
> 2 tests fail.
> > > > > >
> This is the
> > result of:
> > > > > >
> su denemo-user
> > > > > >
> git pull
> > > > > >
> make clean
> > > > > >
> make distclean
> > > > > >
> ./autogen.sh
> > > > > >
> make && make
> > -C tests
> > > check
> > > > > >
> [...]
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > Denemo -
> > MESSAGE :
> > > Opening
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> file
> /home/denemo-user/denemo-git/tests/tmp/scm/SanityCheck.denemo
> > > > > >
> > OK
> > > > > >
> > PASS:
> > integration
> > > > > >
> > > /unit/run-and-quit:
> > > Denemo -
> > > > MESSAGE :
> > > > > Loading
> > > > > >
> preference
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> file: /home/denemo-user/.denemo-1.1.7/denemorc
> > > > > >
> > Denemo -
> > MESSAGE :
> > > Denemo
> > > > version 1.1.7
> > > > > >
> > Denemo -
> > MESSAGE :
> > > Loaded
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> keymap /home/denemo-user/denemo-git/actions/Default.commands
> > > > > >
> > OK
> > > > > >
> > > /unit/scheme-log:
> > > Denemo -
> > > > WARNING : This
> > > > > is warning
> > > > > >
> > Denemo -
> > CRITICAL:
> > > This is
> > > > critical
> > > > > >
> > Denemo -
> > MESSAGE :
> > > Loading
> > > > preference
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> file: /home/denemo-user/.denemo-1.1.7/denemorc
> > > > > >
> > Denemo -
> > MESSAGE :
> > > Denemo
> > > > version 1.1.7
> > > > > >
> > Denemo -
> > MESSAGE :
> > > Loaded
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> keymap /home/denemo-user/denemo-git/actions/Default.commands
> > > > > >
> > Denemo -
> > INFO :
> > > This is info
> > > > > >
> > Denemo -
> > MESSAGE :
> > > This is
> > > > message
> > > > > >
> > OK
> > > > > >
> > > > /unit/scheme-log-error: Denemo -
> > > > MESSAGE :
> > > > > Loading
> > > > > >
> preference
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> file: /home/denemo-user/.denemo-1.1.7/denemorc
> > > > > >
> > Denemo -
> > MESSAGE :
> > > Denemo
> > > > version 1.1.7
> > > > > >
> > Denemo -
> > MESSAGE :
> > > Loaded
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> keymap /home/denemo-user/denemo-git/actions/Default.commands
> > > > > >
> > Denemo -
> > ERROR :
> > > This error is
> > > > fatal
> > > > > >
> > OK
> > > > > >
> > > /unit/thumbnailer:
> > > Running
> > > > scheme:
> > > > > >
> > (d-CreateThumbnail #f
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
> "/home/denemo-user/denemo-git/tests/tmp/thumbnail.png")(d-Exit)
> /home/denemo-user/denemo-git/tests/fixtures/denemo/blank.denemo
> > > > > >
> > Denemo -
> > MESSAGE :
> > > Loading
> > > > preference
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> file: /home/denemo-user/.denemo-1.1.7/denemorc
> > > > > >
> > Denemo -
> > MESSAGE :
> > > Denemo
> > > > version 1.1.7
> > > > > >
> > Denemo -
> > MESSAGE :
> > > Loaded
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> keymap /home/denemo-user/denemo-git/actions/Default.commands
> > > > > >
> > Success 1
> > > > > >
> > Denemo -
> > CRITICAL:
> > > Thumbnail
> > > > 128x128
> > > > > >
> > > >
> file /tmp/Denemo2g5UiI/denemothumb.png
> > gave
> > > > > an error:
> > > > > >
> Failed to open
> > file
> > > > > >
> > > >
> '/tmp/Denemo2g5UiI/denemothumb.png': No
> > such
> > > > > file or
> > > > > >
> directory
> > > > > >
> > Denemo -
> > CRITICAL:
> > > Thumbnail
> > > > 256x256
> > > > > >
> > > >
> file /tmp/Denemo2g5UiI/denemothumb.png
> > gave
> > > > > an error:
> > > > > >
> Failed to open
> > file
> > > > > >
> > > >
> '/tmp/Denemo2g5UiI/denemothumb.png': No
> > such
> > > > > file or
> > > > > >
> directory
> > > > > >
> > Denemo -
> > MESSAGE :
> > > Opening
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> file
> /home/denemo-user/denemo-git/tests/fixtures/denemo/blank.denemo
> > > > > >
> > Denemo -
> > INFO :
> > > Creating
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> thumbnail /home/denemo-user/denemo-git/tests/tmp/thumbnail.png
> > > > > >
> > **
> > > > > >
> >
> > > >
> ERROR:unit.c:121:test_thumbnailer:
> > > > > assertion
> failed:
> > > > > >
> > (g_file_test(thumbnail,
> > > > G_FILE_TEST_EXISTS))
> > > > > >
> > /bin/bash:
> > line 5:
> > > 1553 Aborted
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> G_TEST_SRCDIR="/home/denemo-user/denemo-git/tests"
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> G_TEST_BUILDDIR="/home/denemo-user/denemo-git/tests"
> > > > > >
> > G_DEBUG=gc-friendly
> > > > MALLOC_CHECK_=2
> > > > >
> MALLOC_PERTURB_=
> > > > > >
> > $((${RANDOM:-256} %
> > > 256))
> > > > ${dir}$tst
> > > > > >
> > FAIL: unit
> > > > > >
> >
> > > >
> =====================================
> > > > > >
> > 1 of 2 tests
> > failed
> > > > > >
> > Please
> > report to
> > > > address@hidden
> > > > > >
> >
> > > >
> =====================================
> > > > > >
> > make[2]: ***
> > > [check-TESTS] Error
> > > > 1
> > > > > >
> > make[2]:
> > Leaving
> > > directory
> > > > > >
> > > >
> `/home/denemo-user/denemo-git/tests'
> > > > > >
> > make[1]: ***
> > > [check-am] Error 2
> > > > > >
> > make[1]:
> > Leaving
> > > directory
> > > > > >
> > > >
> `/home/denemo-user/denemo-git/tests'
> > > > > >
> > make: ***
> > [check]
> > > Error 2
> > > > > >
> > make:
> > Leaving
> > > directory
> > > > > >
> > > >
> `/home/denemo-user/denemo-git/tests'
> > > > > >
> >
> > > >
> address@hidden:~/denemo-git$
> > > > > >
> >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > >
> > > > > >
> > >
> > > > > >
> > >
> > The test
> > > parses the
> > > > action
> > > > > directory to
> > > > > >
> find the
> > scheme
> > > > > >
> >
> > commands.
> > > > > >
> > >
> > > > > >
> > >
> > For each
> > > command, it
> > > > checks if
> > > > > an
> > > > > >
> associated
> > test file
> > > > > >
> >
> > exists, lets
> > > > > >
> > >
> > say
> > > > >
> > tests/fixtures/scheme/THECOMMAND.scm.
> > > > > >
> If so it
> > executes
> > > > > >
> > it.
> > > > > >
> >
> > > > > >
> > Is
> > that to say
> > > it
> > > > executes the
> > > > > script
> > > > > >
> starting with
> > a blank
> > > > > >
> >
> > score? Does
> > > > > >
> > it
> > then save
> > > the score
> > > > after the
> > > > > script has
> > > > > >
> executed and
> > test
> > > > > >
> >
> > against
> > > > > >
> >
> > > THECOMMAND.denemo ?
> > > > > >
> > this
> > would
> > > sound like a
> > > > good
> > > > > framework for
> > > > > >
> testing.
> > > > > >
> >
> > > > > >
> >
> > > > > >
> > >
> > If not it
> > > just
> > > > executes
> > > > > >
> > > "(d-THECOMMAND)(d-quit)".
> > > > > >
> > >
> > > > > >
> > >
> > This would
> > > be a weak
> > > > test in
> > > > > that case,
> > > > > >
> >
> > > > > >
> > It
> > could be
> > > made quite a
> > > > bit
> > > > > stronger by
> > > > > >
> making the
> > > > > >
> >
> > environment in
> > > which
> > > > > >
> >
> > (d-THECOMMAND)
> > > is
> > > > executed a more
> > > > > typical
> > > > > >
> environment,
> > by
> > > > > >
> >
> > installing a
> > > > > >
> >
> > couple of
> > > staffs and
> > > > some chords,
> > > > > leaving
> > > > > >
> the cursor on
> > a
> > > > > >
> >
> > chord. Many
> > > > > >
> > more
> > commands
> > > do useful
> > > > things
> > > > > when the
> > > > > >
> cursor is on
> > something
> > > > > >
> > and
> > when
> > > > > >
> >
> > other staffs
> > > are present
> > > > than do
> > > > > something
> > > > > >
> useful in a
> > > > > >
> >
> > completely
> > > empty
> > > > > >
> >
> > score.
> > > > > >
> >
> > > > > >
> >
> > (d-AddAfter)
> > > > > >
> >
> > (d-A)
> > > > > >
> >
> > (d-CursorUp)
> > > > > >
> >
> > (d-CursorUp)
> > > > > >
> >
> > > (d-AddNoteToChord)
> > > > > >
> >
> > > (d-MoveCursorLeft)
> > > > > >
> >
> > (d-THECOMMAND)
> > > > > >
> >
> > (d-Save
> > > > "filename= ....")
> > > > > >
> >
> > (d-Quit)
> > > > > >
> >
> > > > > >
> >
> > would generate
> > > a
> > > > distinctive
> > > > > output file
> for
> > > > > >
> many commands
> > (it
> > > > > >
> >
> > creates
> > > > > >
> > two
> > staffs,
> > > populates
> > > > one and then
> > > > > executes
> > > > > >
> THECOMMAND in
> > that
> > > > > >
> >
> > situation).
> > > > > >
> >
> > > > > >
> > >
> > but it
> > > could at least
> > > > check
> > > > > that the
> > > > > >
> command does
> > not
> > > > > >
> >
> > provoke a
> > > > > >
> > >
> > segfault.
> > > > > >
> >
> > > > > >
> > >
> > > > > >
> > >
> > > > > >
> > >
> > Then the
> > > test could be
> > > > a bit
> > > > > tougher. For
> > > > > >
> example, we
> > could
> > > > > >
> >
> > decide
> > > > > >
> > >
> > that if a
> > > scheme
> > > > command return
> > > > > FALSE, it
> > > > > >
> makes the test
> > > > > >
> >
> > fail.
> > > > > >
> >
> > > > > >
> > I'm
> > not sure
> > > that Denemo
> > > > commands
> > > > > return
> > > > > >
> anything
> > useful. But
> > > > > >
> >
> > detecting
> > > > > >
> >
> > scheme
> > > exceptions would
> > > > be good -
> > > > > we could
> > > > > >
> exit in the
> > trap
> > > > > >
> >
> > handler if
> > > > > >
> >
> > noninteractive
> > > was set.
> > > > We might
> > > > > have to fix
> > > > > >
> one or two
> > > > > >
> >
> > commands that
> > > > > >
> >
> > don't expect
> > > to be
> > > > executed in the
> > > > > given
> > > > > >
> environment -
> > well,
> > > > > >
> > we
> > could
> > > > > >
> > just
> > write a
> > > test for
> > > > them.
> > > > > >
> > >
> > > > > >
> > >
> > What do you
> > > think ?
> > > > > >
> >
> > > > > >
> >
> > > > > >
> > I
> > think this
> > > is
> > > > excellent - it
> > > > > will require
> > > > > >
> a rule to
> > generate
> > > > > >
> > the
> > set
> > > > > >
> > of
> > expected
> > > output
> > > > files, rather
> > > > > than diff
> > > > > >
> them (for the
> > > > > >
> >
> > initial
> > > > > >
> >
> > creation of
> > > the expected
> > > > output),
> > > > > and one to
> > > > > >
> accept an
> > altered
> > > > > >
> > set
> > of
> > > > > >
> >
> > files (copying
> > > them to
> > > > the
> > > > > expected ones)
> > > > > >
> would be a
> > > > > >
> >
> > time-saver
> > > too.
> > > > > >
> >
> > After a change
> > > of
> > > > version in the
> > > > > Denemo file
> > > > > >
> format all the
> > > > > >
> >
> > expected
> > > > > >
> >
> > output files
> > > would
> > > > change - you
> > > > > would make
> > > > > >
> just this
> > change,
> > > > > >
> >
> > check a few
> > > > > >
> >
> > examples and
> > > then run
> > > > the rule to
> > > > > overwrite
> > > > > >
> all the old
> > > > > >
> >
> > versions with
> > > > > >
> > the
> > new ones.
> > > > > >
> >
> > > > > >
> >
> > Richard
> > > > > >
> >
> > > > > >
> >
> > > > > >
> >
> > > > > >
> > >
> > > > > >
> > >
> > > > > >
> > >
> > 2014-04-15
> > > 21:10 GMT
> > > > +02:00
> > > > > Richard Shann
> > > > > >
> >
> > > >
> <address@hidden>:
> > > > > >
> > >
> > On
> > > Tue,
> > > > 2014-04-15 at
> > > > > 19:13 +0100,
> > > > > >
> Richard Shann
> > > > > >
> >
> > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > >
> > > As
> > > you
> > > > remarked, it
> > > > > will be good
> > > > > >
> to generate a
> > > > > >
> >
> > new .scm
> > > > > >
> > >
> > > script each
> > > > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > time
> > > > > >
> > >
> > > a
> > > new
> > > > command is made
> > > > > >
> > >
> > > > > >
> > >
> > This
> > > script
> > > > could assume
> > > > > that a
> > > > > >
> variable,
> > > > > >
> > >
> > > > Denemo-output-filename
> > > > > say,
> > > > > >
> > >
> > was
> > > defined
> > > > which it
> > > > > should use
> > > > > >
> via
> > > > > >
> > >
> > > > > >
> > >
> > > (d-Save
> > > > >
> Denemo-output-filename)
> > > > > >
> > >
> > > (d-Quit)
> > > > > >
> > >
> > > > > >
> > >
> > at
> > > the end of
> > > > the test.
> > > > > (I think I
> > > > > >
> missed the
> > > > > >
> >
> > (d-Quit) out
> > > of
> > > > > >
> > >
> > the
> > > > > >
> > >
> > > current
> > > > script ...)
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> Richard
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Éloi
> Rivard -
> > address@hidden
> > > > > >
> > > > > > « On
> perd plus à être
> > indécis
> > > qu'à se
> > > > tromper. »
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Éloi Rivard
> - address@hidden
> > > > > >
> > > > > > « On perd
> plus à être indécis
> > qu'à se
> > > tromper. »
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Éloi Rivard -
> address@hidden
> > > > >
> > > > > « On perd plus à être
> indécis qu'à se
> > tromper. »
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Éloi Rivard - address@hidden
> > > >
> > > > « On perd plus à être indécis
> qu'à se tromper. »
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Éloi Rivard - address@hidden
> > >
> > > « On perd plus à être indécis qu'à se
> tromper. »
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Éloi Rivard - address@hidden
> >
> > « On perd plus à être indécis qu'à se tromper. »
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Éloi Rivard - address@hidden
>
> « On perd plus à être indécis qu'à se tromper. »
>
>
>
>
> --
> Éloi Rivard - address@hidden
>
> « On perd plus à être indécis qu'à se tromper. »
>
| [Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |