[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: master 262d0c6: Mark some tests as expensive
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
Re: master 262d0c6: Mark some tests as expensive |
Date: |
Sat, 12 Sep 2020 15:29:06 +0300 |
> From: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org>
> Cc: mardani29@yahoo.es, michael.albinus@gmx.de, stefan@marxist.se,
> emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2020 14:11:40 +0200
>
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>
> > How will that work if the change was in Tramp, or was related to
> > Tramp? In my case, for example, it would most probably mean none of
> > the Tramp tests will ever run at all, because they all take more than
> > 1 sec down here.
> >
> > Also, there are some tests with inherent delays (auto-revert tests are
> > one example, but there are others) -- would that mean we don't run
> > these, either?
>
> Yes, if they take more than a second to run.
So how do we make sure some change didn't introduce a bug in those
features?
> We've already made this decision with all the tests previously marked as
> expensive, so there's nothing new here.
There's a large gap between what is currently marked as "expensive"
tests and having entire packages not tested at all. The latter sounds
too radical to me. E.g., auto-revert is an important feature, used by
many people. Not having it in regression testing sounds like a step
backward to me.
> > What I do for a "fast test" use case is to run only the tests directly
> > related to the change, usually the FOO-tests.el tests that correspond
> > to the file FOO I've changed. Sometimes, there are related tests in
> > other files as well. A simple "make FOO-tests" command is all that's
> > needed.
>
> I do that, too, when working on something specific. But being able to
> say "make check" gives me greater confidence that I've not messed up
> something in a related area (and let's face it, the entirety of Emacs is
> "a related area" :-)).
I'm talking about a balance here. Losing the tests of complete
features just because we want tests to finish quickly sounds
sub-optimal to me. Can we make a smarter balance? After all, what
matters is not how long a single test runs, but how long the entire
suite runs. Having a few tests that take more than a second doesn't
necessarily enlarge the total time significantly, especially since
quite a few of the tests are much shorter. So maybe a better
criterion would be the time it takes to run the entire suite?
- Re: master 262d0c6: Mark some tests as expensive, Michael Albinus, 2020/09/11
- Re: master 262d0c6: Mark some tests as expensive, Stefan Kangas, 2020/09/11
- Re: master 262d0c6: Mark some tests as expensive, Daniel MartÃn, 2020/09/12
- Re: master 262d0c6: Mark some tests as expensive, Eli Zaretskii, 2020/09/12
- Re: master 262d0c6: Mark some tests as expensive, Lars Ingebrigtsen, 2020/09/12
- Re: master 262d0c6: Mark some tests as expensive, Eli Zaretskii, 2020/09/12
- Re: master 262d0c6: Mark some tests as expensive, Lars Ingebrigtsen, 2020/09/12
- Re: master 262d0c6: Mark some tests as expensive,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- Re: master 262d0c6: Mark some tests as expensive, Lars Ingebrigtsen, 2020/09/13
- Re: master 262d0c6: Mark some tests as expensive, Stefan Monnier, 2020/09/13
- Re: master 262d0c6: Mark some tests as expensive, Lars Ingebrigtsen, 2020/09/13
- Re: master 262d0c6: Mark some tests as expensive, Michael Albinus, 2020/09/13
- Re: master 262d0c6: Mark some tests as expensive, Michael Albinus, 2020/09/12
- Re: master 262d0c6: Mark some tests as expensive, Lars Ingebrigtsen, 2020/09/13
- Re: master 262d0c6: Mark some tests as expensive, Eli Zaretskii, 2020/09/13
- Re: master 262d0c6: Mark some tests as expensive, Michael Albinus, 2020/09/12
- Re: master 262d0c6: Mark some tests as expensive, Lars Ingebrigtsen, 2020/09/12
- Re: master 262d0c6: Mark some tests as expensive, Michael Albinus, 2020/09/12