From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C73B06DE024A for ; Mon, 28 Aug 2017 18:18:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at cworth.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.011, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=disabled Received: from arlo.cworth.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (arlo.cworth.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KsLTE3XiwU0e for ; Mon, 28 Aug 2017 18:18:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fethera.tethera.net (fethera.tethera.net [198.245.60.197]) by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BCBE86DE012F for ; Mon, 28 Aug 2017 18:18:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from remotemail by fethera.tethera.net with local (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1dmV6q-0006ys-Ax; Mon, 28 Aug 2017 21:14:28 -0400 Received: (nullmailer pid 27009 invoked by uid 1000); Tue, 29 Aug 2017 01:18:03 -0000 From: David Bremner To: Vladimir Panteleev , notmuch@notmuchmail.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] emacs: Add notmuch-update-search-tags In-Reply-To: <20170826015541.25937-1-notmuch@thecybershadow.net> References: <41a586b8-5059-7190-3ae6-ab6017795c28@gmail.com> <20170826015541.25937-1-notmuch@thecybershadow.net> Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2017 22:18:03 -0300 Message-ID: <87wp5n18ac.fsf@tethera.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2017 01:18:09 -0000 Vladimir Panteleev writes: > Speaking of which, I had a fun time trying to figure out why my test > didn't work before I discovered that notmuch-tag-deleted-formats is > reset in test-lib.el. That took quite a bit of debugging; I think it > would be good to fix this inconsistency to avoid other contributors > wasting time on this in the future. Yes, I think you're probably right, although I haven't looked at the resulting work to update all of relevant tests. There's probably a few other places where we've accumulated "technical debt" by doing the easy thing in the test suite. Maybe I'm overthinking this, but it seems like we'd need some way to recognize various faces. There is a package called faceup that is targeted at roughly this problem. I know that racket-mode uses it to test highlighting. Perhaps that's an dependancy we can tolerate for the test suite, at least optionally. Or perhaps some simpler approach can work since we can choose the faces as well. d