[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: regression tests

From: Jan Nieuwenhuizen
Subject: Re: regression tests
Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2007 20:54:32 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.92 (gnu/linux)

Graham Percival writes:

> And only about 10% regtests are useful *as documentation*.  60 easily
> fits inside 220.  If we missed a few, we can add them.
> Most of the regtests are easily covered by the manual.

Okay, maybe I underestimated the manual.  I took a look at some
interesting ones (feature-wise) and they were all covered in the

> What's the documentation value of ?  It works exactly
> like you'd expect it to work.

This tells you two things: 1) lilypond has this feature, so *that* you
can expect this feature to work.  There are still quite a number of
music notation constructs that just are not implemented yet.  2) the
version of lilypond that this regtest refers to, is not broken.

I agree that from a documentation pov, the two points above are rather
weak, but they are still needed or at leaste valuable for a potential
bug report/feature request.  Consider for example  This
is something that you do not want to have in the documentation, but
you do want a power user to know about this.  Especially if it breaks
in a development version.

> Power-users know how to read the program reference.  They can see the
> features there.
> Look, the regression tests are not _intended_ as documentation, and
> they _should not_ be intended as documentation.  They are regression
> tests!

Ok, these are very good points.  I also agree that the new
documentation page is better for new users.  The regression test is
ugly, but that should be fixed, because it's important for developers.
And I would rather have lilypond developer friendly too.  How about if
I add a small link somewhere at the bottom that says `developers/power
user info' to a new page that lists the regession tests and the
comparisons (and ...?)?

> I wish that more users searched the mailist archives, but they
> don't. Useful tips sent to the mailist are essentially lost knowledge;
> that's why I've really been pushing LSR.


> Advertising goes in the Examples or in the new "inspirational
> headword" examples that are planned in GDP.


> Users report bugs without reading the *manual*.  They're not going to
> check the regtests.

Yes, you're probably right.  Thanks for the explanation!


Jan Nieuwenhuizen <address@hidden> | GNU LilyPond - The music typesetter       |

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]