Re: so-long tests

[phillip.lord@russet.org.uk]

On 2019-07-13 11:01, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
>> From: Phil Sainty <psainty@orcon.net.nz>
>> Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2019 21:41:10 +1200
>> 
>> > Why do we need the exception in this case?  Exceptions should
>> > be reserved for exceptional cases.
>> 
>> The reason I used that directory structure is that I ended up
>> using multiple test files.  My initial tests were indeed written
>> as a test/lisp/so-long-tests.el file, but I switched to the
>> alternative structure when I added additional files.
> 
> If you'd like to keep the tests on separate files, it's fine with me,
> but please add a comment somewhere for why these tests are in a
> subdirectory.
> 
> The inconvenient part of this arrangement is that I at least am in the
> habit of typing "make lisp/foo-tests TAB" in the test/ directory after
> making any changes to lisp/foo.el, and I normally take the lack of
> completion to mean there are no tests for foo.el.  Having to remember
> to look in subdirectories is a burden.  It is up to you to decide
> whether your motivation for keeping separate test files is more
> important than that.

There is logic in the Makefile so that "make lisp/foo-tests" or "make 
foo-tests" should
all work, but it fails with the directory option. So

make lisp/emacs-lisp/eieio ("nothing to be done")
make lisp/emacs-lisp/eieio/eieio-tests (runs test)
make lisp/emacs-lisp/eieio/eieio-tests.el (runs test)


Improving this logic so that the first runs the test would solve the 
problem. Could also
add logic so that:

make lisp/emacs-lisp

runs all the tests under emacs-lisp.

I think I put that exception in original because of eieio, and because 
some tests have resource
files associated with them. Probably having the make file support it 
better would make sense.

Phil