[vtk-developers] Testing guidelines

[Marcus D. Hanwell]

Stick with the Test prefix, and move ones we come across to conform seems
like the right way to go then. I had inferred that this was already VTK
convention for tests when I began adding them.

David is right that writing this stuff down somewhere central helps new and
old developers alike, as well as contributors from the wider community.

Thanks,

Marcus

On Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 4:12 PM, Bill Lorensen <bill.lorensen at gmail.com>wrote:

> Of the 549 cxx test files in vtk, 123 do not start with Test, the
> other 426 do start with Test.
>
> On Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 3:54 PM, Bill Lorensen <bill.lorensen at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > I still prefer TestClassName.cxx.
> >
> > On Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 2:55 PM, David Doria <daviddoria+vtk at gmail.com<daviddoria%2Bvtk at gmail.com>>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Can I suggest we agree upon and adopt a convention moving forward? We
> can
> >>> go back and "correct" existing tests as we have time. It seems
> reasonable to
> >>> have a
> >>>
> >>> TestClassName.cxx (without the vtk- prefix) for every concrete class.
> >>
> >> I have followed this convention in the tests I have added, but in many
> ways
> >> the "Test" seems redundant. The big plus is that in my editor of choice
> (Qt
> >> Creator) I am able to type "TestS" and have every test starting with S
> >> listed, but to run a test I have to type,
> >>
> >> ./bin/ChartsCxxTests TestScientificPlot -I
> >>
> >> (e.g vtkPoints -> TestPoints.cxx)
> >>
> >> I doubt the one-to-one mapping of test names to classes will ever be the
> >> case. Some classes are very amenable to this, others are not. I agree
> that
> >> it would be good to establish a standard, and stick to it. Now would be
> a
> >> great time to get something set, and do it. I have been working with
> Bill a
> >> little to migrate some tests to use the testing interactor machinery,
> >> finding issues and seeing what we can do there too.
> >>
> >> Marcus
> >>
> >> (I started a new thread since the old title (about verdict) wouldn't
> >> probably interest many people).
> >> Hi all,
> >> I started a page here:
> >> http://www.vtk.org/Wiki/TestingGuidelines
> >> (and linked to it
> >> from http://www.vtk.org/Wiki/VTK/Developers_Corner#Developers_Corner )
> >> Please add any thoughts and ideas about testing and coverage to that
> page. I
> >> think by having a set of more systematic testing guidelines we will be
> able
> >> to keep much more of the code covered. I've also started a list of
> questions
> >> (about deprecated classes, coverage target, etc) that should be
> addressed.
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> David
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Powered by www.kitware.com
> >>
> >> Visit other Kitware open-source projects at
> >> http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html
> >>
> >> Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe:
> >> http://www.vtk.org/mailman/listinfo/vtk-developers
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Powered by www.kitware.com
>
> Visit other Kitware open-source projects at
> http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html
>
> Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe:
> http://www.vtk.org/mailman/listinfo/vtk-developers
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://public.kitware.com/pipermail/vtk-developers/attachments/20100821/5dd5ae38/attachment.html>