From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,88ed72d98e6b3457 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-10-10 09:43:58 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!news-xfer2.atl.newshosting.com!63.218.45.10.MISMATCH!newshosting.com!news-xfer1.atl.newshosting.com!news-feed01.roc.ny.frontiernet.net!nntp.frontiernet.net!chi1.webusenet.com!news.webusenet.com!snoopy.risq.qc.ca!nf3.bellglobal.com!nf1.bellglobal.com!nf2.bellglobal.com!news20.bellglobal.com.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Warren W. Gay VE3WWG" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Standard Library Interest? References: <3F7F760E.2020901@comcast.net> <3F8035B0.7080902@noplace.com> <3F816A35.4030108@noplace.com> <3F81FBEC.9010103@noplace.com> <6Ingb.30667$541.13861@nwrdny02.gnilink.net> <3F82B4A4.5060301@noplace.com> <3F82F527.3020101@noplace.com> <3F846B5E.9080502@comcast.net> <3F855460.6020804@noplace.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2003 12:29:06 -0400 NNTP-Posting-Host: 198.96.223.163 X-Complaints-To: abuse@sympatico.ca X-Trace: news20.bellglobal.com 1065803321 198.96.223.163 (Fri, 10 Oct 2003 12:28:41 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2003 12:28:41 EDT Organization: Bell Sympatico Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:617 Date: 2003-10-10T12:29:06-04:00 List-Id: Stefan Lucks wrote: > On 9 Oct 2003, Stephen Leake wrote: >>Stefan Lucks writes: >>> 1. a unit test for the package and >> >>I find Aunit to be a good unit test framework (see >>http://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/grace/ for a working example). > > You missed my point! > > Think of a "customer" (i.e., any programmer who wants to "with" the > library) and call her A. A somehow (perpaps by downloading it from the web > site) gets her hands on the source code of some library packages. The very > first thing she will (or at least should) do is to ask each package: "Are > you okay?" ("Is this package compiling under my compiler and running on my > target platform under my target platform's configuration?") > > The best way to answer this question is to run the entire battery of unit > tests which have been used by the author of the library package. I would > want to provide A with a simple button to fire the test battery. And this > button should be at the same place and have the same shape and color for > all packages of the standard library! > > It is a non-issue for A, which test framework has been used by the author > of the library package. The general idea is good (provision for testing), but I don't like the child package idea. It enjoys a different visibility as a child package, than the consumer of the package would enjoy. Thus, I don't think the tests would be accurate to the "user experience" as they need to be. I would suggest that the test packages and programs, fall under their own heirarchy, complete and separate from the library units. After all, if I test the libraries at install time, I may want to dispense with the test files after the fact. It is easy to dispense with the test packages, if they are separated from the end product. Warren.