[ruby-core:39397] Re: RubySpec vs CRuby's test/...

2011/9/9 Luis Lavena <[e-mail]>:
> On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 7:40 PM, SASADA Koichi <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> (2) We can add code modification and test cases in one commit. =A0If we
>> can't do it, we need commit commit modifications and RubySpec isolation.
>
> I believe that tests that fix bugs in MRI can be done in a single commit.
>
> Changes in MRI that do change the behavior of Ruby itself need to be
> reflected in RubySpec.
>
> If not, how other implementations will match?

Who apply the change to RubySpec is not self-evident.
Yeah, I know you think the person who change it is.

>> (3) It is difficult to judge test is an independent or not.
>> Additionally, we don't need to insert "guard" about version or
>> implementation on our "test/*". =A0It seems tough work to insert correct
>> "guard".
>>
>> (4) Current RubySpec is not portable (especially Windows)
>> [ruby-core:39379].
>>
>
> RubySpec is portable, see [ruby-core:39382]

Say portable after it works in the real world.
Current framework is just a paper tiger.
I can't think it works from the result, 99 failures 608 errors.

>> I think this problem is "who pay efforts on it?".
>
> We all pay, MRI and other implementation developers pay the price.
>
> There is no consolidated place of reference to look into the language
> specification.

I think rdoc should describe it.

>> One solution is continuing current style (using test/*) and someone
>> migrate tests to RubySpec if needed. =A0But we need "someone".

Why *you* don't do it?

>> Other solution is MRI committer join to maintain RubySpec. =A0MRI
>> developer (including me) should change development style and several
>> overhead to do (I think inserting correct "guard" is difficult).

Run `git shortlog -sn` on RubySpec before say that.
(yeah I rarely add new spec)

--=20
NARUSE, Yui =A0<[e-mail]>