l...@phdk.org writes: >> P.S. We really need tests for org-persist. > > Yeah I did note a couple of pretty straight-forward opportunities for > clean-up wrt. redundancies and readability, but without > regression-tests and lacking confidence that I understood everything I > thought it was best to keep the patch as simple as possible. I > would've felt pretty stupid if I accidentally introduced a new > regression in my regression-fix haha. I'll include some of the stuff > from my notes below in case it's of interest to anybody working on > org-persist. > ...
It is hard to judge many of the comments without seeing the right context. Ideally, the proposed ideas could be done in a form of patches ;) That said, I would be similarly hesitant to merge large changes in org-persist without adding at least some basic tests. Would you be interested to create testing/lisp/org-persist.el file and add one or two basic tests that replicate what the preview branch does? That way, we can at least make sure that things are not broken as we change the actual library. Then, we can start looking into changing org-persist itself. (Also, having _a_ test file will greatly reduce friction to add more tests) -- Ihor Radchenko // yantar92, Org mode contributor, Learn more about Org mode at <https://orgmode.org/>. Support Org development at <https://liberapay.com/org-mode>, or support my work at <https://liberapay.com/yantar92>
