[BUG][FIX] TestRunner UI interaction
Colin Putney
cputney at wiresong.ca
Wed Mar 3 16:10:01 UTC 2004
This one troubles me. It's not a fix, so much as a removal of the
feature that exposes the bug.
And it's an important feature. I work on several packages with
extensive test suites, and I really like the fact that the enhanced
test runner doesn't tie up the UI while the tests are running,
something which can take several minutes, and which I do very
frequently. This change would slow my development pace to a crawl.
It's also an overstatement to say that running the tests in the
background is "problematic if any of the tests involve anything Morphic
related." I run Morphic-related tests in the background all the time
with no problems.
That's not to say that there *is* no problem, only that we should track
it down and fix it, rather than remove an important feature. Would it
be feasible to alter either the problematic tests or Morphic its self
to work properly in the background? Would it be useful to set up a
sandbox - some sort of invisible world with it's own UI thread - for
Morphic-related tests?
I seem to recall that one of the enhancements made to JUnit after it
diverged from SUnit was the ability to add a "run in the background"
decoration to test cases. Perhaps we could do something similar with
SUnit.
Colin
On Mar 2, 2004, at 6:16 PM, Andreas Raab wrote:
> "Change Set: TestRunnerFix
>
> Date: 3 March 2004
>
> Author: Andreas Raab
>
> TestRunner was changed so that it runs the tests in a background
> process
> instead of running in sync with Morphic. This is problematic if any of
> the
> tests involve anything Morphic related in which case the tests raise
> spurious errors in the UI.
>
> For example, in about one out of five cases the DebuggerUnwindBug test
> raised one of these errors (very hard to find since they depend on
> lots of
> varying factors).
>
> These changes make TestRunner run within the Morphic UI process so that
> errors like the above are prevented."
> <TestRunnerFix.1.cs>
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|