[#8136] Confused exception handling in Continuation Context — "Robert Dober" <robert.dober@...>

Hi all

13 messages 2006/07/06

[#8248] One-Click Installer: MinGW? or VC2005? — "Curt Hibbs" <ml.chibbs@...>

I just posted this to ruby-talk. But I would also like to discuss this

33 messages 2006/07/18
[#8264] Re: One-Click Installer: MinGW? or VC2005? — Charlie Savage <cfis@...> 2006/07/19

From my experience using both tool chains on Windows (for the ruby-prof

[#8266] Re: One-Click Installer: MinGW? or VC2005? — "Curt Hibbs" <ml.chibbs@...> 2006/07/19

Tim, I'm going to top reply since your post was so long. I'm interested in

[#8267] Re: One-Click Installer: MinGW? or VC2005? — Charlie Savage <cfis@...> 2006/07/19

> Tim, I'm going to top reply since your post was so long. I'm interested in

[#8271] my sandboxing extension!! — why the lucky stiff <ruby-core@...>

I have (what feels like) very exciting news. I finally sat down to code up my

17 messages 2006/07/19

[#8430] Re: doc patch: weakref. — "Berger, Daniel" <Daniel.Berger@...>

> -----Original Message-----

19 messages 2006/07/28
[#8434] Re: doc patch: weakref. — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2006/07/29

Hi,

[#8436] Re: doc patch: weakref. — Daniel Berger <djberg96@...> 2006/07/29

Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#8437] Re: doc patch: weakref. — Mauricio Fernandez <mfp@...> 2006/07/29

On Sat, Jul 29, 2006 at 07:37:24PM +0900, Daniel Berger wrote:

[#8441] Inconsistency in scoping during module_eval? — "Charles O Nutter" <headius@...>

I have the following code:

18 messages 2006/07/30
[#8442] Re: Inconsistency in scoping during module_eval? — nobu@... 2006/07/30

Hi,

[#8443] Re: Inconsistency in scoping during module_eval? — "Charles O Nutter" <headius@...> 2006/07/30

Why does this:

[#8445] Re: Inconsistency in scoping during module_eval? — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2006/07/30

Hi,

[#8454] Re: Inconsistency in scoping during module_eval? — "Charles O Nutter" <headius@...> 2006/07/31

So to clarify...

Re: [PATCH] --fqname option to test/unit/autorunner.rb

From: Sam Roberts <sroberts@...>
Date: 2006-07-13 18:43:29 UTC
List: ruby-core #8210
On Fri, Jul 14, 2006 at 02:34:34AM +0900, jonathan gold wrote:
> Thanks again for getting back to me. Perhaps my original focus on the 
> fact that I had multiple test cases in the same file was something of a 
> red herring -- I think it's only incidental to the real issue.
> 
> As I understand the current intent of AutoRunner, and of the testing 
> libraries as a whole, the intent is to have a collector 
> (Collector::ObjectSpace, Collector::Dir, or otherwise) gather up 
> multiple test cases from somewhere. As it is today, the '--testcase' and 
> the '--name' options are in place to allow the user to filter the 
> collection, regardless of how they were collected, in some meaningful 
> way. I believe that these two options leave a gap for what I'm proposing 
> with '--fqname', and so it seems that the patch would be in line with 
> the current spirit of the libraries.

For what its worth, I think your point makes sense.

One question, could the syntax of --name be extended, so if there is a #
or a :: in it is referring to a specific test name in a specific test
suite? I think it would be useful to just have a single option, a bit
like rdoc, if it is specific enough it will run one test, if not it will
run multiple. Just a thought.

Thanks,
Sam



In This Thread