From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Christian Ohler Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: ert.el --- Emacs Lisp Regression Testing Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2008 12:32:44 +0100 Message-ID: <477F6ADC.9060502@fastmail.net> References: <47782302.5000201@fastmail.net> <85ir2arbix.fsf@evri.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1199532935 32621 80.91.229.12 (5 Jan 2008 11:35:35 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2008 11:35:35 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Phil Hagelberg Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jan 05 12:35:55 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JB7Ji-0001hB-6Z for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 05 Jan 2008 12:35:54 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JB7JL-0005Jc-LA for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 05 Jan 2008 06:35:31 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JB7If-0004wH-Ve for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 05 Jan 2008 06:34:50 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JB7Id-0004uZ-Dy for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 05 Jan 2008 06:34:48 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JB7Id-0004uW-8x for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 05 Jan 2008 06:34:47 -0500 Original-Received: from out4.smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.28]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JB7Id-0004FJ-1b for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 05 Jan 2008 06:34:47 -0500 Original-Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.internal [10.202.2.41]) by out1.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E85C282E9B; Sat, 5 Jan 2008 06:34:44 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from heartbeat2.messagingengine.com ([10.202.2.161]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Sat, 05 Jan 2008 06:34:44 -0500 X-Sasl-enc: v3uHK4qOEREfLmdUUOlM27/t56s0yveKrMorjkcI3dTu 1199532884 Original-Received: from kraut.local (unknown [92.226.146.197]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1380227B12; Sat, 5 Jan 2008 06:34:43 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <85ir2arbix.fsf@evri.com> X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:86142 Archived-At: Phil Hagelberg, 2008-01-03: > I'm the author of elunit. I'm obviously very interested in unit testing > in Emacs Lisp (preferably test-driven development, but any tests are > good.) elunit has mostly been driven by my own needs, so it's no > surprise that it doesn't seem like a great fit for everyone, but I would > love to see unit testing get more traction in the Emacs community, > whether it's through elunit or ERT. I'm familiar with (an earlier version of) elunit; I've used it for writing a test suite for xmtn (a DVC backend for the distributed version control system monotone). It served its purpose, but I wanted something that offers an even better workflow for test-driven development. None of the existing tools did that. > ERT looks several orders of magnitude more complicated than elunit, but > obviously it has a lot more functionality. There are some parts in ERT that can be simplified, but the parts that are really tricky (`ert-run-test-debugger' and friends and `should') are inherently tricky. Other tools take simpler approaches but have less functionality and are less general. > I've beaten my head against the problem of testing with a fresh > instance, and it's always been rather awkward. Hmm, what do you mean here? What were your goals, what was your approach, and why were you unhappy with the results? I skimmed your page on behave.el ( http://dev.technomancy.us/Behave.el ). What are its main features? Adding tags and docstrings to ERT would not be difficult. I think ERT's `should' is already more powerful than behave.el's `expect'. I would like to look at your code, but the command from http://dev.technomancy.us/DotFiles , git clone http://git.caboo.se/technomancy.git says Cannot get remote repository information. Perhaps git-update-server-info needs to be run there? Christian.