New testing framework

Peter Arrenbrecht peter.arrenbrecht at gmail.com
Tue Jun 15 00:58:20 CDT 2010


On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 12:49 AM, Martin Geisler <mg at lazybytes.net> wrote:
> Matt Mackall <mpm at selenic.com> writes:
>>> But I'm also not at all wed to the damned Bourne shell. All I want is
>> something that looks enough like it so that things that look like
>> trivial shell scripts (ie 2/3rds of the test suite) continue to work.
>> If you can make something that lets us do:
>>
>> hgt.dumbshell("""
>> mkdir a
>> cd a
>> hg init a
>> echo a > a
>> hg ci -Am "this is a test"
>> hg log
>> """)
>>
>> and does the appropriate things (preferably with built-ins) on Windows
>> and Unix, then you have my attention.
>
> Agreed -- this was what I suggested, with the added detail of merging
> the script with the expected output.

Which would in the end also yield tests that can be embedded in
documentation (we just have to be able to toggle the way script and
output lines are identified in the source - in reST, for instance).
-parren


More information about the Mercurial-devel mailing list