From: Glen Choo <chooglen@google.com>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: Linus Arver <linusa@google.com>,
Josh Steadmon <steadmon@google.com>,
git@vger.kernel.org, calvinwan@gmail.com, szeder.dev@gmail.com,
phillip.wood123@gmail.com, avarab@gmail.com,
sandals@crustytoothpaste.net
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 1/1] unit tests: Add a project plan document
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2023 15:48:11 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <kl6ly1jspsgk.fsf@chooglen-macbookpro.roam.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqqzg48dfsq.fsf@gitster.g>
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:
> Glen Choo <chooglen@google.com> writes:
>
>> - Inline tests are, by nature, non-production 'noise' in the source
>> file, and can hamper readability of the file. This will probably be
>> exaggerated in Git because our interfaces weren't designed with unit
>> tests in mind, so tests may be extremley noisy to set up.
>
> I do agree with the first sentence, but I am not sure what you mean
> by "our interfaces weren't designed with unit tests in mind".
[...]
> Do
> you mean that in the longer term it would be good to tweak the
> interfaces with "unit tests in mind" (and add new interfaces that
> way?
Ah. I agree, but this isn't what I meant.
> Or do you mean interfaces that are written with "unit tests
> in mind" inherently becomes noisy when inline non-production tests
> are mixed in?
I meant the opposite of this actually. Interfaces with "unit tests" in
mind result in simpler tests, so they will be less complicated to setup
and thus be less noisy. Testing the existing, pre-unit test interfaces
will be very noisy, so I don't think they will lend themselves well to
inline tests.
But of course, (per the prior point) we are trying to make the
interfaces cleaner, which should naturally make them more unit
test-friendly, so this will become less important over time. I think the
other objection - that we want unit tests to enforce cleanliness of our
build dependencies - is the more important one.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-07-06 22:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-05-17 23:56 [PATCH RFC v2 0/4] Add an external testing library for unit tests steadmon
2023-05-17 23:56 ` [PATCH RFC v2 1/4] common-main: split common_exit() into a new file steadmon
2023-05-18 17:17 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-07-14 23:38 ` Splitting common-main (Was: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 1/4] common-main: split common_exit() into a new file) Josh Steadmon
2023-07-15 0:34 ` Splitting common-main Junio C Hamano
2023-08-14 13:09 ` Splitting common-main (Was: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 1/4] common-main: split common_exit() into a new file) Jeff Hostetler
2023-05-17 23:56 ` [PATCH RFC v2 2/4] unit tests: Add a project plan document steadmon
2023-05-18 13:13 ` Phillip Wood
2023-05-18 20:15 ` Glen Choo
2023-05-24 17:40 ` Josh Steadmon
2023-06-01 9:19 ` Phillip Wood
2023-05-17 23:56 ` [PATCH RFC v2 3/4] Add C TAP harness steadmon
2023-05-18 13:15 ` Phillip Wood
2023-05-18 20:50 ` Josh Steadmon
2023-05-17 23:56 ` [PATCH RFC v2 4/4] unit test: add basic example and build rules steadmon
2023-05-18 13:32 ` Phillip Wood
2023-06-09 23:25 ` [RFC PATCH v3 0/1] Add a project document for adding unit tests Josh Steadmon
2023-06-09 23:25 ` [RFC PATCH v3 1/1] unit tests: Add a project plan document Josh Steadmon
2023-06-13 22:30 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-06-30 22:18 ` Josh Steadmon
2023-06-29 19:42 ` Linus Arver
2023-06-29 20:48 ` Josh Steadmon
2023-06-30 19:31 ` Linus Arver
2023-07-06 18:24 ` Glen Choo
2023-07-06 19:02 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-07-06 22:48 ` Glen Choo [this message]
2023-06-30 21:33 ` Josh Steadmon
2023-06-29 21:21 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-06-30 0:11 ` Linus Arver
2023-06-30 14:07 ` Phillip Wood
2023-06-30 18:47 ` K Wan
2023-06-30 22:35 ` Josh Steadmon
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=kl6ly1jspsgk.fsf@chooglen-macbookpro.roam.corp.google.com \
--to=chooglen@google.com \
--cc=avarab@gmail.com \
--cc=calvinwan@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=linusa@google.com \
--cc=phillip.wood123@gmail.com \
--cc=sandals@crustytoothpaste.net \
--cc=steadmon@google.com \
--cc=szeder.dev@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).