2010/12/1 Adam Kennedy <a...@ali.as>: > Agreed on the leaking. > > I've had a quick look through what is there at the moment and have > concluded that I'm best to start by refactoring the test suite. > > The current test suite has two separate copy and pasted test scripts > for the XS and pure perl cases. If I diff between the various > releases, it appears that they are being synchronised largely by hand > and in a fairly patchy fashion. > > So I've created a t::lib::Test module and I'm extracting the test code > for each function into it's own test_uniq, test_whatever function, and > changing both test scripts to use the common testing code.
That's whaat I now do in SQL::Statement (including instant fixes), two years after taking the module. I don't want to do the same mistake on other modules again :) > Once that is done, it should simplify the process of adding new tests > for the various problems in only one place. After that, I might look > at re-applying some of the simpler fixes that don't require XS-fu and > expanding the tests for the relevant functions to test against more > cases. > > There's also at least one CPAN Tester throwing out-of-memory errors in > the tests, so I'm going to audit the size of the lists it uses to test > with to try and reduce that problem. Having test-cases is the most important thing for me (that's why the co-working with Tux works so great - he's very good in creating test cases which I can use to fix the issue easily). You'll help me a lot when you can do this. > I'll assume that early in the new year you'll swoop in and do the hard > stuff, hopefully the house will be clean and ready for you by then. Great - finally I profit by this chaos :D So I see that I get up my svn quicker (I don't like the repo-structure on svn.ali.as - I work with branches and tags and bundle the structure for each module: mod/trunk -- mod/branches -- mod/tags). Jens > Adam K > > > On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 5:13 PM, Jens Rehsack <rehs...@googlemail.com> wrote: >> 2010/12/1 Adam Kennedy <a...@ali.as>: >>> Since my releases seem to have "regressed" issues that were "fixed" in >>> the no-longer-existing 0.23 (and created problems for some people) my >>> plan to not have to touch the actual code seem to have been derailed a >>> bit. >>> >>> I'm going to see if I can apply some of the fixes suggested in RT, or >>> reapply some of the fixes from 0.23. If I can't knock out a decent >>> test-passing dev release I'm then going to rip out the leaking XS >>> versions of the functions as damage control. >>> >>> Alternatively, if Jens plans to work on it straight away then I'll yield. >> >> Current plan of order of tasks: >> - finish current task (SQL::Statement / DBI-bundled Pure-Perl-DBD's) >> - Proc::ProcessTable code merge from current $work on libstatgrab >> (make it thread-safe, all fields available on all OS, ...) >> - List::MoreUtils (first (re)write tests to cover leak-test, then fix >> and go on business as usual) >> >>> I'll see how far I can get now, but won't push a stable release >>> without Jens' approval. >> >> The meanwhile deleted releases had other issues - all XS related. >> I studied a bit since I got maintainership - should be easy to fix >:-) >> >> From my point of view, nothing beyond 0.22 didn't work for real. >> I hope I get P::PT managed this year, but could require some weeks >> at start of 2011. >> >> So you have a rough time line. I suggest you don't try to fix the >> leaks without tests :) >> >> Jens >> >>> Adam K >>> >>> On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 11:27 PM, David Golden <xda...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 4:57 PM, Adam Kennedy <a...@ali.as> wrote: >>>>> I'll try to replicate on a 5.8.8 system later today, but this should >>>>> not change your priority (although the existence of a Critical >>>>> Twiki-breaking bug might). >>>> >>>> Isn't it just so tempting to stall on 5.8.X bugs until April 20, 2011 ... >>>> :-) >>>> >>>> -- David >>>> >>> >> >
