There's a few things that I know the SPEC needs to address. - Pending tests
- Some flexible concept of around-all and around-each that allow separating Definers from Runners (currently, to implement clojure.test's once-fixtures, it requires a custom Definer *and* a custom Runner) - Whether Runners should pass lazy sequences to Reports - Being able to compose runners somehow (i.e. have an auto-runner that also runs them in random order, and runs tests in their own threads, three different runners being used together) Thoughts? -Steven On Sunday, June 9, 2013 1:07:20 PM UTC-5, Steven Degutis wrote: > > Jay (and others), > > First of all, you must understand where test2 came from. It started as a > bunch of people** in #clojure discussing what we'd change about > clojure.test if we could. > > We realized we can't change clojure.test because (1) this would break > backwards compatibility, and (2) clojure.test is really slow-moving since > it lives inside Clojure. So the idea was to create a successor to > clojure.test with the changes we wanted, and which didn't live inside > Clojure. Hence the name test2. > > These very smart people were brainstorming for a few hours, and came up > with some really good ideas. I started organizing their thoughts in a wiki, > and was trying to guide the discussion with some provoking questions. > > Two high-level concepts kept recurring in the discussion. First, it should > be really simple, building on Clojure concepts, and not using any special > magic. The second one naturally follows from this: if it's just plain old > no-magic Clojure, you can easily build on top of it. In other words, you > get extensibility for free. > > This is when we realized that, if done right, test2 could be flexible > enough where Midje/Speclj/Expectations could be re-written as extensions to > test2. Or you could just use vanilla test2 similarly to clojure.test. Or > you can mix and match extensions. > > Let me briefly say that I don't consider test2 to be my project. All I did > was turn their ideas into a > SPEC<https://github.com/evanescence/test2/blob/master/SPEC.md>and some code. > I knew that everyone involved was too busy to do it, even > though they wanted it to exist. So I jumped in and did my small part. > > You're suggesting we should have started with your lib and proposed > changes. Let's generalize this for a second and say "with anyone else's > lib" since there are other test-lib authors who might say the same thing. > First of all, whose lib should we start with? Picking any existing one > gives an unfair bias toward that lib's feature-set. Second of all, when a > feature-set changes this drastically, it's usually clearer to see best > solution from a blank slate. Third of all, this is intended to be a > community-controlled lib, but each existing lib already has an owner in > full control. > > But you're right. I shouldn't have just assumed the SPEC is ready and > started calling for extensions. Sure, the initial conversation in IRC gave > us a really solid starting-point, but let's admit that the SPEC isn't ready > yet and needs work. I apologize for being so naive. > > I think we all agree that it's extremely important to discuss the SPEC as > a community. In fact, since this is a pre-ANN, let's consider this thread > the perfect place for such a discussion. > > For example, in its current incarnation, having once-fixtures a la > clojure.test requires a custom runner, but it should really be part of a > Definer's role. And there's some confusion as to whether Runners should > give Reporters a lazy sequence of test-results or not, which would mean not > actually running each test until the Reporter needs them to be run. Or, > maybe the 4 roles defined in the SPEC are inadequate in the first place and > need to be changed up somewhat. > > ** I'm not going to drop names in case they don't want to be part of this > discussion, but maybe they'll come in here and affirm that what I'm saying > isn't self-serving BS, but that it's all true and an accurate > representation of the events. > > -Steven > > > On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 11:45 AM, Jay Fields wrote: > >> I'd like to mention that expectations* has 0 open pull requests, 0 open >> issues, and is very actively maintained**. Steven, I don't want to >> discourage you from creating your own testing framework, I think everyone >> should, it's a very educational experience. >> >> I just wanted to be clear that no one has ever asked me for any help >> extending expectations, and anyone who chooses to use expectations should >> feel free to contact me with any suggestions. >> >> * https://github.com/jaycfields/expectations >> ** https://github.com/jaycfields/expectations/commits/master >> >> >> On Saturday, June 8, 2013 11:14:42 AM UTC-4, Steven Degutis wrote: >>> >>> Test2 is a new testing lib for Clojure, where the power is its >>> simplicity, extensibility, and a >>> SPEC<https://github.com/evanescence/test2/blob/master/SPEC.md> much >>> like Ring's. >>> >>> Github: >>> https://github.com/**evanescence/test2<https://github.com/evanescence/test2> >>> >>> Some background: It came out of >>> discussions<https://github.com/evanescence/test2/wiki/Communal-Brainstorming> >>> with >>> the smart folks in #clojure, who were frustrated with the inflexibility of >>> existing libs, and intended this to be the spiritual successor to >>> clojure.test. We wanted something that was still simple like clojure.test, >>> but could be extended externally much more easily in case you wanted >>> features found in clojure.test, Midje, Speclj, or Expectations, or whatever >>> else. >>> >>> This is a pre-ANN because it's more of a call for extensions. I've >>> written one last night, >>> test2-autorunner<https://github.com/evanescence/test2-autorunner>, >>> which took about an hour. This should give some idea of how easy it is and >>> how well-designed the SPEC was by the smart folks of #clojure. There are >>> some ideas at the bottom of the wiki, but of course any extensions are >>> encouraged. >>> >>> -Steven >>> >> -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
