[Gambas-user] Coming back to gb.test

Christof Thalhofer chrisml at deganius.de
Fri Apr 3 20:55:43 CEST 2020


Am 03.04.20 um 18:49 schrieb Tobias Boege:

> I started this thread with a list of problems I was made aware of and
> which I was going to tackle on the weekend. These problems popped up
> after we seemed to agree on everything and my branch got merged.
> 
> What I mainly wanted to discuss in the opening mail is the Try-Catch
> business and the flowchart. But you brought up a bunch of other things
> you are not content with that I'm honestly wondering if we should go
> forward at all or just revert to the state of four years ago.

Sorry. This is my quarter-brazilian temperament.

I spent four years developing it, besides when I was programming other
things. Not four years ago...

Maybe it is not the most elegant, but it was very stable and reliable.
If it did something suspicious, i fixed it and often wrote a test to
ensure that it would not happen again. This happened when I had to test
different parts of our software.

You cannot imagine the things that can go wrong.

> I made a list of the things you mentioned and will work on them tomorrow
> in the way I think is best -- on a separate branch, no pull requests,
> no merges. After the bugs in TapPrinter are fixed, which has to happen
> anyway if we don't want to revert to Print statements scattered all over
> gb.test, 

It was not "scattered all over", gb.test had it's own tap printer
(Private Sub Test in Assert) , which was called by the assertions. The
few occasions, where it printed a "not ok" directly could also have used
that, if it was in a separate module.

I know, your printer is better, also your assertions are. But the
downside is, they are sitting in gb.test.tap and not in gb.test.

> I do think that the gaps between what I would like and what
> you would like are not that hard to jump over. 

Ok, now that I cooled down a bit, I also think so. :-)

> Speaking of which: could everyone read the flowchart in the end or
> should I make one with computer letters?

For me it's not the letters. It's the basic idea that I do not like. I
think you will discover the drawbacks if you try to restore the deleted
functionality and make sure that it fulfils the available tests. Then
you will see that it swallows certain things and does not display them
and that it is very difficult to debug because the code you have to
debug runs in a component which is not able to test itself!

This is the wrong architectural decision for a test system.

gb.test is able to test itself and you should use that instead of
discussing things away.

If it fulfils it's own tests I would start to think that it starts to
get reliable.

Alles Gute

Christof Thalhofer

-- 
Dies ist keine Signatur

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.gambas-basic.org/pipermail/user/attachments/20200403/6530f58e/attachment.sig>


More information about the User mailing list