SUnit: Skipping tests?
Andreas Raab
andreas.raab at gmx.de
Mon Mar 27 09:09:29 UTC 2006
Markus Gaelli wrote:
> If it's not possible to put the data zipped into a method because it
> would be too big somehow, I'd consider your two examples logically
> equivalent to "If the moon is made out of green cheese anything is
> allowed". So it is kind of ok that these tests are green.
It's 8MB a pop so no, I think it's not really feasible to stick that
test data into a method ;-)
> And you are suggesting to indicate clearly, which tests depend on some
> external resource?
Well, really, what I'm looking for is something that instead of saying
"all tests are green, everything is fine" says "all the tests we ran
were green, but there were various that were *not* run so YMMV". I think
what I'm really looking for is something that instead of saying "x
tests, y passed" either says "x tests, y passed, z skipped" or simply
doesn't include the "skipped" ones in the number of tests being run. In
either case, looking at something that says "19 tests, 0 passed, 19
skipped" or simply "0 tests, 0 passed" is vastly more explicit than "19
tests, 19 passed" where in reality 0 were run.
Like, what if a test which doesn't have any assertion is simply not
counted? Doesn't make sense to begin with, and then all the
preconditions need to do is to bail out and the test doesn't count...
In any case, my complaint here is more about the *perception* of "these
tests are all green, everything must be fine" when in fact, none of them
have tested anything.
Cheers,
- Andreas
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|