On Aug 29, 2013, at 18:39 , Kouhei Sutou <kou / cozmixng.org> wrote:

> Hi,
>=20
> In <20130829225745.C6CA312081D / neon.ruby-lang.org>
>  "[ANN] minitest_tu_shim 1.3.3 Released" on Thu, 29 Aug 2013 15:57:31 =
-0700,
>  Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby / zenspider.com> wrote:
>=20
>> minitest_tu_shim version 1.3.3 has been released!
>>=20
>> * <http://rubyforge.org/projects/bfts>
>>=20
>> minitest_tu_shim bridges the gap between the small and fast minitest
>> and ruby's huge and slow test/unit.
>=20
> Is minitest really small? Is it old information?
>=20
>  * The number of lines of minitest 1.3.0:           595
>  * The number of lines of minitest 5.0.6:          3210
>  * The number of lines of test/unit in Ruby 1.8.7: 3572
> ...
> If I remove the following unused test runners from test/unit
> in Ruby 1.8.7 count, I get 2163. It is smaller than minitest
> 5.0.6.

You're really going to compare using `wc -l`? Minitest has over a =
thousand lines of rdoc. Test/unit has about a quarter of that.

Minitest provides unit testing, a speccing DSL, curve fitting benchmark =
testing, Mocking, all while still being one of the fastest test =
frameworks out there.

Test/unit only has unit testing. And it isn't fast.

Yes, I'd still say that it is small if you're actually going to compare =
apples-to-apples.

Yes, I'd still say that minitest is fast, considering it still beats the =
pants off of test/unit on both positive and negative test benchmarks.