[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [PATCH] org-test: Create a collaborative test set for Org buffer par

From: Max Nikulin
Subject: Re: [PATCH] org-test: Create a collaborative test set for Org buffer parser
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2021 23:16:38 +0700
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.14.0

On 11/12/2021 21:39, Ihor Radchenko wrote:

The attached patch is an attempt to create something like shared repo
for Org element parser tests.

"[PATCH]" prefix in the subject might be a reason why you message received less attention than it should.

The test set is essentially a series of .org files alongside .el files
containing normalised output of `org-element-parse-buffer'. (see the

I think, the set should contain hundreds of tests to be helpful, thus 2 files per test will likely be inconvenient since most of samples will be short. I suggest to group test input and results into large files. Such tests should be augmented by some metadata: keywords (labels, tags). E.g. besides heading

- sample: "* Simple Heading"
  keywords: heading

it should be possible to filter related cases with similar markup

- sample: "*Bold* emphasis"
  keywords: emphasis, heading
  description: Despite line is started from a star,
    there is no space after it, so it is not a heading.

- sample: " * Unordered list item"
  keywords: list, heading
  description: Due to leading space it is a list item,
    not a heading.

- sample: "*"
  keywords: text, heading
  description: Not a heading since there is no space after the star.

I omitted test IDs above.

Version of Org and test set should be included into metadata for the whole suite.

Since partial compliance is assumed, format of test results should be declared as well to be able to publish overview or comparison.

Are properties like :begin and :end mandatory for reference results of parsing? They make structures more verbose and harder to read. Often it is enough to compare content and similar properties.

Any comments or suggestions?
I am particularly looking for thoughts about licensing and possible
distribution of the test set in separate repository.

Since these tests will unlikely become a part of some software, I do not think that GPL may be an obstacle for any project. Requirement of signed consent will likely prevent contributing of new cases from some developers.

reply via email to

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