On 2002.05.21, Bob Hutchison <hutch / recursive.ca> wrote:
> I don't know if I'd like to give up the organisation of multiple test
> files, and I don't know if I'd like to have to organise and navigate
> through a single file of 2500 lines.

This was my initial negative reaction to Dave's otherwise
excellent idea.

Right now, tests are organized at a higher level as test
suites.  Dave's way, while great for the "simple testing" couples
tests with classes, not by test suites.

In other words:  how would I run a subset of tests that were
coupled to a class?  How could I have N of the tests use one
setup/teardown while the other M tests use a different or none
at all?

There might be some core tests that want to live directly
inside the class, but then maybe those really ought to be
assertions that are actually part of the class's code itself,
not as a test that only gets run conditionally.  I'm not
100% convinced of this, but ... it's a thought.

I definitely think having RDoc be Test::Unit-literate would
be cool.  Pass RDoc over my unit tests and have it extract
test cases and their conditions (the "message" passed to
the assert_* methods maybe) ... but then, after all this,
isn't it simply easier to just pretty-print your test
cases as-is and let the reader do the intelligent work?

-- Dossy

-- 
Dossy Shiobara                       mail: dossy / panoptic.com 
Panoptic Computer Network             web: http://www.panoptic.com/ 
  "He realized the fastest way to change is to laugh at your own
    folly -- then you can let go and quickly move on." (p. 70)