From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: 27.0.50: How can I test a buffer-local window-configuration-change-hook in batch mode? Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2019 18:07:42 +0300 Message-ID: <83tv7vtuip.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83ftjixlwh.fsf@gnu.org> <72dda818-78b6-953f-ba5c-e2e1c81c036e@orcon.net.nz> <83tv7xw78d.fsf@gnu.org> <83k18tvvw9.fsf@gnu.org> <83d0elvsfu.fsf@gnu.org> <87wocrd6ub.fsf@gnus.org> <835zkbvfaa.fsf@gnu.org> <87sgnfd4zn.fsf@gnus.org> <83zhhntyw6.fsf@gnu.org> <87k18rd39u.fsf@gnus.org> <83v9sbtw1q.fsf@gnu.org> <87eeyzd0qn.fsf@gnus.org> Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="212429"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" Cc: psainty@orcon.net.nz, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Lars Ingebrigtsen Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Oct 26 17:08:04 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iONff-000t3I-0x for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 26 Oct 2019 17:08:03 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:40442 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iONfd-0005Re-Cc for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 26 Oct 2019 11:08:01 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:52447) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iONfW-0005HB-Sn for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 26 Oct 2019 11:07:55 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:41768) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iONfW-00053c-BA; Sat, 26 Oct 2019 11:07:54 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=2563 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1iONfV-0000Xd-NZ; Sat, 26 Oct 2019 11:07:54 -0400 In-reply-to: <87eeyzd0qn.fsf@gnus.org> (message from Lars Ingebrigtsen on Sat, 26 Oct 2019 16:45:20 +0200) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:241464 Archived-At: > From: Lars Ingebrigtsen > Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, psainty@orcon.net.nz, emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2019 16:45:20 +0200 > > What Xen gives us is repeatability, and without that, automatic testing > becomes dicey. There are so many variables (screen size, fonts > installed, etc) that doing testing on these things automatically without > a controlled environment is somewhat futile. Not IME. For most display tests I can think of, small variations in the dimensions don't matter, and where they do, we can always arrange for exact matches. Look at the large fraction of display problems that we usually succeed in reproducing on a completely different system. I guess we have very different experiences regarding this, or maybe we think about very different aspects to test.