On Wed, Jul 31, 2024 at 08:51:00AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Patrick Steinhardt <ps@xxxxxx> writes: > > > - The clar gives us the ability to pick which tests to run via command > > line parameters, which I personally like more than picking the > > specific binary to run. > > One thing I am very unhappy about the current t/unit-tests/ is that > the GIT_SKIP_TESTS mechanism is not effective at all. If we can > wrap clar's test selection syntax inside t/Makefile to work with > GIT_SKIP_TESTS (or its superset equivalent), that would be a great > plus. Yeah, I guess that shouldn't be too hard. > > - The clar replaces some test assertions that we already have. They > > feel a bit more mature, but overall there aren't all that many > > assertions available. If we wanted to pick it up, then we'd likely > > have to add some more wrappers. > > That is a slight bummer, as importing an externally developed one is > with the hope that we won't have to enhance or maintain it, but > we'll see how much burden it will be. The clar exposes generic helpers like `cl_assert`, but also comparison functions like `cl_assert_equal_$t` for pointers, integers and strings. If anything is missing, it also exposes the building blocks to add project-specific assertions so that it would be easy to add for example `cl_assert_equal_oid`. One thing I have been missing is non-equality comparisons like `cl_assert_lt_i`/`cl_assert_gt_i`. But adding that to the clar itself and upstreaming it should be easy enough, also because we know the people maintaining it. Other than that I think it's mostly fine and should serve as a good baseline. Patrick
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
