On Thu, Apr 13, 2006 at 08:27:26PM -0700, Jon A. Cruz wrote:
On Apr 13, 2006, at 11:37 AM, Bryce Harrington wrote:
Oh, the other thing is that I figure you won't want to see the raw output of the make check command, so there needs to be a parser to summarize it. Do you have an opinion on how this report should look? (E.g., do you want to see just the fails, or both fails plus passes? Do you want to see details about the fails, or just a link to the results?)
Once things switch to CxxTest, the output will be a bit different.
By default, successful tests generate a single '.'. When things fail or warn, then more is emitted. Also, if any asserts actually fail, the unit test program will exit with non-zero
Hmm, well from my end I wouldn't see the individual unit test program exit statuses - I just see the exit code from make, plus whatever output gets emitted. For tracking purposes, it would actually be preferrable to see the test name and its status reported. If it just prints out '.' then it might be difficult to verify that a given unit test ran, and potentially could lead to some ambiguity if, for instance, a failed test printed an error message with periods in it.
Do you have an example of what the CxxTest output looks like? Also, if the test system is going to get reimplemented, then it sounds like it would not be worth the time to finish hooking up to the current tests?
Bryce