on 23/01/02 7:06 PM, Withers, Robert at rwithers at quallaby.com wrote:

> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ducasse [mailto:ducasse at iam.unibe.ch]
>> 
>>> 
>>> This need for effective review is also why I felt it
>> important to have SUnit
>>> supported in the BC image.  (changeset posted yesterday).
>> We should be able
>>> to produce 20-30 tests for BlockClosures, themselves, and
>> 50+ for generators
>>> nad tools that use blocks, like the Compiler, the
>> CCodeGenerator, the
>>> Inspector, and the debugger.
>> 
>> I'm not good enough nor have the time to help in that task
>> but this REALLY
>> important. Having tests will really help. So please please push that.
>> 
> 
> Well I don't like being pushy, but I will try to take a little initiative.
> :)  I think it is a nice opportunity to learn about the TestViaMethodCall
> mechanism, at least for some core tests.
> 
> Speaking of testing, the SDDB, that Duane just implemented, would be great
> for storing Tests alongside the documentation of classes.  This way we don't
> have to pay for them to sit in the image.  We could create a TestCaseLoader,
> which would load, run, then unload the TestCases.
> 

Hi rob

The problem with the test as done in the exampleFor: method is that there do
not really represent one single scenario.

Iwwrote a lot of Sunit change and I like the fact that every test tells me a
little story. The exampleFor: approach is non incremental I cannot remove on
test, for that I have to edit and recompile the method. So I'm really in
favor of SUnit tests or the exampleFor: method should be split in several
little methods. 

Stef