Re: New run-tests code
| From: | Pierre Joye | Date: | Wed, 09 Sep 2009 12:55:29 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: New run-tests code | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 | Groups: | php.qa |
| Request: | Send a blank email to php-qa+get-65358@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 2:50 PM, Hannes Magnusson<bjori@php.net> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 13:14, Pierre Joye<pierre.php@gmail.com> wrote:
>> hi Derick,
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 12:04 PM, Derick Rethans<derick@php.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Yes, I do. We picked the original behavior so that we can make our tests
>>> work in every environment. It provides a better spread of code and
>>> settings in the wild.
>>
>> We did not do it by design. There are tests (less every day) that are
>> still dependent on the system php.ini, but they should be fixed
>> instead (splited if necessary).
>>
>> The concept of unit tests is not to write generic tests but to test
>
> It is. And it isn't.
> The generic tests do not have --INI-- sections.
> The test that are targeted at special ini obscurity have --INI-- sections.
There are no obscure ini settings, or almost none left :).
>> each single unique cases we can figure out, different ini settings are
>> different cases. It also makes testing and debugging much easier, and
>
> Exactly. And there is no way we can duplicate every single test case
> for the 1million ini variations.
For a given function there is never dozen of different settings. I
still think we should test each case with the various possible ini
settings.
Doing so will not only help us to:
- finally have a set of tests to valid change in some settings
- take decision quicker to see what can be affected if we remove or
add a setting
- debug easily
Yes it is more work, but it is definitely a step forward in the right direction.
Cheers,
--
Pierre
http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org