From: Nathaniel Talbott <nathaniel@...>
Date: 2004-08-17T01:11:36+09:00
Subject: Re: Test::Unit feature request - regexp pattern of tests to run

On Aug 16, 2004, at 11:32, Simon Strandgaard wrote:

> On Monday 16 August 2004 17:15, Nathaniel Talbott wrote:
>> We already chatted about this on IRC, but just so that everyone knows:
>> as David points out in this thread, you can do test matching on the
>> command-line by simply surrounding your pattern with //:
>>
>>    ruby test.rb -n /pattern/
>>
>> However, there is no (easy) programmatic interface to this
>> functionality. Test::Unit is overdue for some serious TLC, and this 
>> has
>> made its way on to the TODO list.
>
> What about invoking disabled test's (I prefix them with x) via the
> commandline. Is that a feature you will add ?

No, it just isn't practical (implementation-wise). See the reply I just 
sent to an earlier email of yours.


> Another issue.. it could be nice if Test::Unit could detected if
> there are disabled tests in the code.. and then output a warning:
> WARNING: there is 3 disabled tests.
> But it would dictate that all people also had to use an x prefix.
> This last issue is less important to me.. but still something I
> would be glad that Test::Unit had builtin. What do you think?

I remain completely opposed to adding another distinction to tests 
(warnings). I've actually considering removing the distinction between 
failures and errors, and might still do so at some point. Distinctions 
between types of failures are something that I think should not be 
(hard-coded) in the framework, but rather managed by the programmer. I 
might provide some framework support for that management in the future, 
though.


Nathaniel
Terralien, Inc.

<:((><