On 11/29/05, Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > jerry gay wrote: > > > +---t > > | +---compilers > > | | +---imcc # moved from imcc/t/ > > | | | <snip t/compilers/imcc/ subdirs> > > This doesn't really work for me. imcc/t* used to test some general > parsing features, code generation and register allocation. Therefore it > should run early in the tests. > you've caught me in the middle of the test reorganization. i've moved around most everything i want to now, and i have yet to address test ordering. in fact, this is what i'm planning on doing today.
> What about this file organization and testing order: > > t/imcc # 1. or 2. > /op # 2. or 1. > /pmc > /dynclass > ... > # more tests > i'd like to see test failures occur as quickly as possible to make the development cycle at least a little quicker (the test suite takes almost 20mins on win32--however some platforms are *much* quicker.) i'll take your info above into account when reordering the tests. > We could also get rid of the imcc prefix and move tests and test files > to more appropriate files and just delete some duplicates. > i'll take a closer look at these tests and think about what's appropriate. expect questions, either here or on #parrot. > Also t/compilers is now split into 2 passes with different tests, which > looks strange to me. > indeed, and it will be changed soon. it still may be in two or more passes as the grouping of tests at the moment is by logical similarity (e.g. compilers are grouped together,) but the ordering will be by importance of catching functional failures. if you see the order looks a little different than you like, please speak up, or just patch it :) ~jerry
