Those AMD test are local, not yet committed? I cannot test what isn't there...
EdB On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 7:54 PM, Michael Schmalle <apa...@teotigraphix.com> wrote: > I guess I have to stick my foot in my mouth on this. > > I see you didn't actually implement the compiler yet. So I will stand by > what I just said that changing this is bad so don't do it (future tense). > > But you did clobber a commit I made a day or two ago. This is making AMD > tests I have broken. > > I will add the methods back if you are done working on the TestBase class. > > If you want to functional test the compiler, make a new test base. > > 1443539 commit. > > Mike > > > > Quoting Michael Schmalle <apa...@teotigraphix.com>: > >> Hi Erik, >> >> Yes, this was a bad move. The way the TestBase was setup was testing >> 'unit's of code, thus we are using a simple setup for config and a simple >> AST syntax request to get a FileNode. >> >> You need to change it back, what you changed it to is a 'functional' test. >> We are not testing functionality of the compiler. >> >> By doing what you did, you introduced variance to the tests. The way the >> TestBase was setup was a very simple load, parse, return the node. >> >> Also, I don't think you didn't an SVN update did you? I added two methods >> that allowed the sub classes to added libraries and source paths to the >> configuration. addLibraries(), addSourcePath() >> >> Can you please revert? >> >> Thanks, >> Mike >> >> >> Quoting Erik de Bruin <e...@ixsoftware.nl>: >> >>> Hi Mike (I guess ;-)), >>> >>> I was poking around the FalconJx unit tests to set up the testing of >>> projects (tests made up of more than one (generated) file), and I >>> noticed that the tests "roll their own" implementation of the >>> compilation process. It's generally the same, but some differences >>> exist. While trying to get the project testing going, I thought I'd >>> refactor MXMLJSC in such a way that it can be used for unit testing as >>> well. I thought this might increase the reliability of the unit tests, >>> as they would always test the compilation implementation that is >>> actually used by FalconJx. Is that a really bad idea? >>> >>> EdB >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Ix Multimedia Software >>> >>> Jan Luykenstraat 27 >>> 3521 VB Utrecht >>> >>> T. 06-51952295 >>> I. www.ixsoftware.nl >>> >> >> -- >> Michael Schmalle - Teoti Graphix, LLC >> http://www.teotigraphix.com >> http://blog.teotigraphix.com >> >> > > -- > Michael Schmalle - Teoti Graphix, LLC > http://www.teotigraphix.com > http://blog.teotigraphix.com > -- Ix Multimedia Software Jan Luykenstraat 27 3521 VB Utrecht T. 06-51952295 I. www.ixsoftware.nl
