Re: call for more ert tests

[Lennart Borgman <lennart.borgman@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1146 bytes --]

On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 8:21 PM, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:

> > From: Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org>
> > Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 13:31:50 -0400
> >
> > One thing that could help reduce this is more unit tests.
> > If you haven't used it, ERT makes it pretty easy to write tests.
> > Of course, many aspects of Emacs's behaviour are not easy to test (GUI
> > stuff, etc.), but many are. See test/automated/ for examples. [2]
> >
> > For example, package.el seems like something that should have a test
> > suite.
> >
> > So if you fix a bug, please consider adding a unit test to make sure it
> > does not come back. Or if you rewrite a lisp package, consider adding
> > tests at the same time to check that obvious functionality still works.
> >
> > I know writing tests is maybe not as interesting as writing shiny new
> > features, but I think it will save work in the long run.
>
> IMO, unless we require every new feature to come with a test and a
> report that no regressions were found by running the existing tests,
> we will never get any better testability than what we have now.
>
>
Maybe writing tests for all bugs that shows up?

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2104 bytes --]