I also did a sharedSetupTestCase for our application because the setup 
were long and repeated over and over and I could not solve that
with a resources.

Stef

On 3 oct. 04, at 19:57, Doug Way wrote:

>
> On Sep 24, 2004, at 3:12 PM, stéphane ducasse wrote:
>
>> I'm creating some tests for the decompiler (inspired by the one in 
>> SystemDictionary) and they are realllllly slow.
>> So I'm thinking to create some kinds of SlowTestCase that could be 
>> turned off/on on demand. But I would like to know if someone already 
>> proposed a solution to that problem.
>
> I think this is pretty common with unit tests... we had a similar 
> situation where I used to work.  I think we ended up just having a 
> different test suite for the slow tests, and they were run nightly, 
> instead of being run whenever you checked in code.  But having a 
> SlowTestCase class might be an okay way to handle it too.
>
> There are some other slow tests already in the Squeak tests which 
> should probably be moved to a separate batch of tests which don't have 
> to be run as often. (such as the PNG tests, they seem quite slow)  
> Although there may be a few slow tests which exercise a really 
> important/broad area of Squeak, which you'd want to keep with the 
> regular tests.
>
> - Doug
>
>
>