Morgan Smith <[email protected]> writes: > I also want to ask a question about test naming though. What is the > standard for naming tests? This is actually a pretty important question > I think because that's used for ERT selectors. > > It seems to be something like this with many exceptions: > > #+begin_src elisp > (rx > (optional "test-")
This one is indeed inconsistent. > (literal FILE-NAME) > (or "-" "/") "-" is very rare. We should probably go with majority. > (literal (string-trim-left FUNCTION-NAME > (rx (literal FILE-NAME) (one-or-more "-")))) > (optional > (or "-" "/") > (literal EXTRA-DESCRIPTOR))) > #+end_src > > Personally, I think the current formula is a little lax. > > Should the beginning "test-" be optional or do we want to fix that? Is > it redundant information that can simply be removed? Probably redundant, honestly. Tests are not functions and do not occupy function slow of a symbol. So, we do not need to worry about namespace beyond other existing tests. That said, de facto Emacs test convention is function name for testing function behavior and "test-*" for testing generic behavior not tied to a single function. > Are we ok with the file-name separator being "[-/]" or should we > standardize on "/"? "/" will probably make more sense. At least, it will make selectors somewhat easier. > Also where do we want to shove in the word 'characterization'? Would it > be better not not shove it in and just make it a tag? I think we do not need it in the names, as discussed in a related thread. > Should we change the default ERT selector to exclude characterization > tests? I believe we should to prevent new contributors from fighting > frivolous noise. With a comment marking characterization tests, I do not think that it is a problem. -- Ihor Radchenko // yantar92, Org mode maintainer, 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>
