t/include/ holds only one test file

[Peter Lobsinger]

On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 8:59 AM, Will Coleda <will at coleda.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 8:44 AM, Peter Lobsinger <plobsing at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 7:13 PM, James E Keenan <jkeen at verizon.net> wrote:
>>> $ ll t/include/
>>> total 1
>>> -rw-r--r-- 1 jimk jimk 760 Dec 14 20:30 fp_equality.t
>>>
>>> This directory in our repository holds a single test file.  From the
>>> documentation:
>>>
>>>  t/include/fp_equality.t - Test runtime/parrot/include/fp_equality.pasm
>>>
>>>  DESCRIPTION:  Tests fp_* functions.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Could this file be moved to another directory?  Do we expect to have to
>>> write tests for other files under runtime/parrot/include/?
>>
>> There are only 2 other files in that directory which are not
>> automatically generated by h2inc:
>>  * test_more.pir - straightforward and already gets a heavy workout
>> from our test suite. no test required.
>>  * hllmacros.pir - contains macros for emulating HLL constructs in
>> assembly. if I remember correctly, these are known to be buggy, and
>> their use is ill-advised. why hasn't this been removed yet?
>
>> Neither of these two files are likely to get tests.
>
> $ ack -ai hllmacros t
> t/library/hllmacros.t
> 4:.include 'hllmacros.pir'
>
> $ prove t/library/hllmacros.t
> t/library/hllmacros.t .. ok
> All tests successful.
> Files=1, Tests=17,  1 wallclock secs ( 0.03 usr  0.01 sys +  0.02 cusr
>  0.03 csys =  0.09 CPU)
> Result: PASS
>
> These macros are tested, and are used extensively in partcl.
>
> Also:
>
> $ prove t/library/test_more.t
> t/library/test_more.t .. ok
> All tests successful.
> Files=1, Tests=117,  1 wallclock secs ( 0.04 usr  0.01 sys +  0.12
> cusr  0.04 csys =  0.21 CPU)
> Result: PASS

I stand corrected. Don't know where I got the impression that they were buggy.

>
>> This directory is exclusively for files using assembly code textual
>> inclusion as a loading mechanism. Among parrot devs, this has fallen
>> out of favour as a means of separating abstractions out into files. We
>> are unlikely to add more files that use textual inclusion at the
>> assembly level as their method of loading.
>>
>> Recap: new tests for existing files unlikely & new files unlikely.
>> therefore, new test files unlikely.
>>
>>> I would like to know because 't/include/' is currently *not* include under
>>> either 'make test' or 'make fulltest' -- which means it's not regularly
>>> being run at all.
>>
>> Well that's a problem. These tests prove (or should prove) that the
>> floating point comparison macros (which are/should be used pervasively
>> through our test suite) are sane. This sanity is critical to the
>> testing of other components of parrot.
>>
>>> Thank you very much.
>>> kid51
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> http://lists.parrot.org/mailman/listinfo/parrot-dev
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> http://lists.parrot.org/mailman/listinfo/parrot-dev
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Will "Coke" Coleda
>