[squeak-dev] Re: State of Testing in Squeak

Ronald Spengler ron.spengler at gmail.com
Fri Dec 4 01:17:50 UTC 2009


Ken: 30 to 45 minutes? Really? I'm experiencing on the order of hours
on a dual core 2GHz machine. What gives?

On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 5:07 PM, Igor Stasenko <siguctua at gmail.com> wrote:
> How about that then:
> - mark lengthy test with pragmas
> - add a checkbox in test runner or run all but lengthy by default, and
> then put lengthy tests in separate list, where user could run all of
> them or select which one to run?
>
> Or, by foreseeing more generic use cases, we could scan all test
> methods for pragmas like:
> <testCategory: #foo>
>
> and then give user a selection where he could pick which ones to run or not.
>
>
> 2009/12/4 Ken Causey <ken at kencausey.com>:
>> On Thu, 2009-12-03 at 15:54 -0800, Andreas Raab wrote:
>>> Ken Causey wrote:
>>> > On Thu, 2009-12-03 at 13:36 -0800, Ronald Spengler wrote:
>>> >> Would the people of the community be receptive to moving long running
>>> >> tests out to a separately loadable package?
>>> >
>>> > I fear that separating a subset of tests from the rest will result in
>>> > them being largely forgotten and unused.
>>>
>>> True, but which choice is preferable: Having a few tests never run, or
>>> having no tests ever run? (hey, that rhymes! ;-)
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>    - Andreas
>>
>> I think 'never' is the wrong word.  What I'm thinking of is an option to
>> not run the long running tests that defaults to running all tests and
>> actually requires some small effort from the user with hopefully at
>> least a little thought and recognition that the other tests do exist.
>> Separating out the long running tests into a separate package likely
>> means newcomers are never aware of them and the rest of us forget about
>> them, they are no longer maintained, and that's the end of them.  If a
>> test is truly not useful, or at least never worth the running time
>> required, fine just delete it;  but I have to assume that is not
>> generally the case otherwise it would have already happened.
>>
>> I agree that currently running all the tests is not something you do
>> without thought, but it's not that bad.  I'm using a 7 or 8 year old
>> system and continuing to do other work while the tests run and they
>> finish in 30-45 minutes for me.
>>
>> Ken
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
>
>



-- 
Ron



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list