Ludovic Courtès <l...@gnu.org> writes: > Tomas Volf <~@wolfsden.cz> skribis: > >> There is a page in the GNU Standards document regarding the format of error >> messages. Both GNU Emacs and Vim are able to parse it and support jumping to >> next/previous error. My version did not produce a line in this format for >> failed tests and this commit rectifies that. >> >> * module/srfi/srfi-64.scm (test-on-test-end-simple)[non-passed]: Write >> out (standards)Errors compatible line. >> >> Reported-by: Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <jann...@gnu.org> > > I personally like this but my gut feeling is that we may want to stick > to whatever the previous SRFI-64 implementation was doing, to avoid > disruption or breakage for users (remember we’re applying this to a > stable series).
I agree that the output of the simple test runner of the current and the reference versions do differ, by necessity. I tested the change in Emacs and it seems to work out of the box, the compilation buffer correctly navigates to the locations. However I understand your worries regarding the stable series. What I would suggest is that I can extract the test runner from the reference implementation, and package it as reference/test-runner-simple. User then could, with a simple code change, use it instead of the new compliant runner. I would even go as far as to provide a mechanism to select the runner by environment, so GUILE_SRFI64_DEFAULT_TEST_RUNNER=reference would cause test-runner-factory to return reference/test-runner-simple. If unset or empty value, it would use the new runner as it does now. This will allow restoring the previous output format even with no code changes. Combined with NEWS entry, that could be sufficient? What do you think? Tomas -- There are only two hard things in Computer Science: cache invalidation, naming things and off-by-one errors.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
