emacs-orgmode
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [O] Re: Test framework needed


From: Rainer M Krug
Subject: Re: [O] Re: Test framework needed
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 16:22:16 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.15pre) Gecko/20110207 Lightning/1.0b2 Shredder/3.1.9pre

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

On 30/03/11 16:11, Eric Abrahamsen wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 30 2011, Rainer M Krug wrote:
> 
>> On 30/03/11 15:46, Eric Abrahamsen wrote:
>>> On Wed, Mar 30 2011, Rainer M Krug wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi
>>>>
>>>> I was bitten again from an unintended regression in org-mode, and that
>>>> the second time in two weeks.
>>>>
>>>> I am probably not the right person to suggest this, but I think it is
>>>> time to introduce a test framework for org-mode, to ensure that the
>>>> (without doubt useful) approach to develop org-mode does not lead to
>>>> regressions.
>>>
>>> This would be the page to start with, though the most likely candidate
>>> (Elisp Regression Testing) is only available in Emacs trunk at the
>>> moment…
>>>
>>> http://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/UnitTesting
>>
>> Am I right in assuming, that all of the possible test frameworks would
>> require org files and the expected output (tengle, export to ...,
>> agenda, ...)? In this case, would it make sense to start collecting
>> those, as they can easily be user contributed, consequently representing
>> a cross section of the use cases (even not intended use cases)?
> 
> Yup, what you would need is some org source files that exercise all of
> the possible export options (for testing export, for example), including
> weird edge cases, and then ERT (if that's what we ended up using) would
> provide handy functions for making sure the export output matches
> expectations. The excellent gentleman who created the ODT exporter,
> whose name currently escapes me, has already created test files for his
> exporter—that would be a perfect place to start.
> 
> Covering all of org's various functions would end up being a bit of a
> PITA, though you're quite right that it's an excellent idea, and will
> become more and more necessary.

So would there be a possibility of "normal org users" (if there is such
a thing ...) to contribute to this?

What would be needed? Any specific structure of the org files?

Rainer

> 
> E
> 
> 


- -- 
Rainer M. Krug, PhD (Conservation Ecology, SUN), MSc (Conservation
Biology, UCT), Dipl. Phys. (Germany)

Centre of Excellence for Invasion Biology
Natural Sciences Building
Office Suite 2039
Stellenbosch University
Main Campus, Merriman Avenue
Stellenbosch
South Africa

Tel:        +33 - (0)9 53 10 27 44
Cell:       +27 - (0)8 39 47 90 42
Fax (SA):   +27 - (0)8 65 16 27 82
Fax (D) :   +49 - (0)3 21 21 25 22 44
Fax (FR):   +33 - (0)9 58 10 27 44
email:      address@hidden

Skype:      RMkrug
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk2TPJgACgkQoYgNqgF2egoWKwCeMjWgggD7JMhVTrQTHe3f7n6s
VhgAn2CG25hOa1Q4RPufarreQVYlezHm
=18s2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]