[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Gnash-dev] Re: Testing API

From: Rob Savoye
Subject: Re: [Gnash-dev] Re: Testing API
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2010 12:07:49 -0600
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv: Gecko/20100430 Fedora/3.0.4-2.fc12 Lightning/1.0b1 Thunderbird/3.0.4

On 06/04/10 11:47, Benjamin Wolsey wrote:

> I also agree that the check API has several advantages over the way
> you've done the tests. Sandro has already mentioned the fact that it

  You don't have to use the DejaGnu API if you don't want to. We don't
agree on this issue, and I don't think we have to agree as the "best"
API is a matter of personal choice. My choice is based on over 20 years
of writing testsuites for multiple projects. Attempting to convince me
to use the check API for my own coding tasks is just not going to work.
This is not a one way is right, the other way is wrong issue.

> Also, the test was originally written using the check API and wasn't
> changed until you recently started working on it. Finally, the entire

  I'll assume this is a technical statement... I changed it as
originally it was all bogus tests to a handful of unimplemented methods.
Since I was going to be working on the code heavily for weeks, I used
the API I prefer for code development. I'd prefer it stay that way till
ExternalInterface is completed, after that I don't care.

  If you want to add the support that's left, namely SetVariable,
GetVariable, and call, then you can use whatever API you want. I have no
problem with the other changes you made today to ExternalInterface, so
maybe you prefer it that way. Otherwise I prefer to leave it in the
format I find best supports development of the code I'm still developing.

        - rob -

reply via email to

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