Re: Suggestion for ASDF:TEST-OP

Hi Robert,

I heartily endorse the spirit of this proposal. I would, however,  
like to add to it.

In order for automated testing to function as part of a build/make  
system, there must be some way for the system to know the results of  
the testing. Did all tests pass? Were there failures? Were there  
errors? Was every test that I care about actually run (this last  
makes sense in the case where the tests run can be configured; it  
isn't much use to automate testing if you can skip all the important  
tests by accidently using the wrong configuration file!).

Therefore I think that the following is an additional desideratum for  
the ideal 'test-op

1. (asdf:oos 'asdf:test-op <system>) should return a single whose  
meaning is as follows:

     * t - all passed
     * nil - something unspecified went wrong
     * :errors - there was at least one error during testing
     * :failures - there was at least one test failure

2. If a test system is able to, it should return more information  
about exactly which tests were run and their individual stati in the  
second return value. This is optional behavior.


On Nov 12, 2007, at 11:00 AM, Robert Goldman wrote:

> Here's a tentative proposal for extension:
>
> Add to the test-op a test-result-stream slot and initarg (this is a
> *tentative* proposal --- if it were to be approved, someone should  
> come
> up with something less verbose) that would default to t.

Actually, I like test-result-stream

> Explicitly declare that the test results should be written to this  
> stream.

Yes.
--
Gary Warren King, metabang.com
Cell: (413) 559 8738
Fax: (206) 338-4052
gwkkwg on Skype * garethsan on AIM





-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/