On 2023.11.16 09:42, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > Hi Josh, > > On Wed, 15 Nov 2023, Josh Steadmon wrote: [snip] > > If I was forced to pick a way to get everything under one process, I'd > > lean towards autogenerating individual shell script wrappers for each > > unit test. But I'm open to discussion, especially if people have other > > approaches I haven't thought of. > > One alternative would be to avoid running the unit tests via `prove` in > the first place. > > For example, we could use the helper from be5d88e11280 (test-tool > run-command: learn to run (parts of) the testsuite, 2019-10-04) [*1*]. It > would probably need a few improvements, but certainly no wizardry nor > witchcraft would be required. It would also help on Windows, where running > a simple test helper written in C is vastly faster than running a complex > Perl script (which `prove` is). > > Ciao, > Johannes > > Footnote *1*: I had always wanted to improve that test helper to the point > where it could replace our use of `prove`, at least on Windows. It seems, > however, that as of 4c2c38e800f3 (ci: modification of main.yml to use > cmake for vs-build job, 2020-06-26) we do not use the helper at all > anymore. Hopefully it can still be useful. 🤞 Sorry for the silence on this topic; the holidays plus some family illnesses kept me away from the list for a while. I have a working implementation of this. I plan on cleaning it up a bit and sending it as an RFC series either tomorrow or next week. Thank you for the suggestion!
