[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: ERT conventions?
From: |
Marcin Borkowski |
Subject: |
Re: ERT conventions? |
Date: |
Sun, 06 Sep 2015 08:10:15 +0200 |
On 2015-09-06, at 07:27, Alexis <flexibeast@gmail.com> wrote:
> Marcin Borkowski <mbork@mbork.pl> writes:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I'm learning the ERT package. I'd like to know whether there
>> are any conventions/good practices regarding writing tests.
>> Eg., should they be written in a file separate from the package?
>> (I guess yes, for obvious reasons.) Are there any standards for
>> the name of that file? In general: could anyone using ERT (or
>> any other testing facility, for that matter) share some
>> experiences worth knowing?
>
> i've found ERT pretty easy to use. For `org-vcard`, i've put the
> test suite in a single file within a distinct 'tests' folder,
> which also contains a 'data' folder containing various data
> sources for the tests to run on:
Thanks!
And it's not that ERT is difficult to use, no. What I'm asking is (for
instance): is it better to say
(ert-deftest my-function-test ()
"Tests the `my-function' function."
(with-temp-buffer
(insert "input")
(goto-char (point-min))
(should (this-be-satisfied)
(should (that-be-satisfied)))))
or maybe
(ert-deftest my-function-test ()
"Tests the `my-function' function."
(should (with-temp-buffer
(insert "input")
(goto-char (point-min))
(this-be-satisfied)))
(should (with-temp-buffer
(insert "input")
(goto-char (point-min))
(that-be-satisfied))))
?
The former avoids code repetition and probably is (a bit) faster; the
latter /might/ result in better reporting.
Etc.
> Alexis.
Best,
--
Marcin Borkowski
http://octd.wmi.amu.edu.pl/en/Marcin_Borkowski
Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science
Adam Mickiewicz University