On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 03:42:00PM -0700, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Tom, > > On Sat, 25 Jan 2025 at 14:51, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > > > > On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 02:31:36PM -0700, Simon Glass wrote: > > > > > This fixture name is quite long and results in lots of verbose code. > > > We know this is U-Boot so the 'u_boot_' part is not necessary. > > > > > > But it is also a bit of a misnomer, since it provides access to all the > > > information available to tests. It is not just the console. > > > > > > It would be too confusing to use con as it would be confused with > > > config and it is probably too short. > > > > > > So shorten it to 'ubpy'. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> > > [snip] > > > 102 files changed, 2591 insertions(+), 2591 deletions(-) > > > > First, I'm not sure I like "ubpy". I believe "u_boot_console" is because > > it's how we interact with the stdin/stdout of the running U-Boot. And > > indeed it provides more than that. But ubpy is too abstract and unclear, > > and looking at the diffstat, I don't know that big global rename is > > justified to save text space. > > I actually get quite confused hunting around in the fixtures so I > suspect others do too. I would like to settle on some better names. > > Yes, I don't like ubpy much, either. Your favourite AI suggests > 'fixture' or 'test_env', both I which I prefer. The only challenge is > that 'env' has various other meanings in U-Boot.
Yes, until someone has a better suggestion than "ubpy", we should leave things alone. "fixture" has its own meaning within pytest and so that would also be confusing. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
