On Thu, 2011-12-08 at 13:05 -0500, Kevin Hunter wrote:
> > Ah - you just want to run a smaller set of tests, and faster than
> > running all of the 'make unittest' changes in master ?
>
> Sorry for the late response ... in short, exactly. More specifically, I
> wish there were a way to run exactly and only one test (i.e. a single
> ::testFunction()).
Fine, sounds like a worthy goal. I suggest you hack cppunit to add some
magic macro wrappers to stringify the function name, and allow some
run-time parameter that will filter the tests immediately on entry down
to the one you want.
> Having this would enable me to drastically reduce my compile wait time.
> On my old hardware, that translates a 15-20s turnaround time about 3-4s.
Sure, sounds good - so hack it up :-) patches gratefully recieved to
improve unit tests; for extra bonus points ;-) when a test fails it
should print the command-line to get just that one test running.
Also - it seems Noel Grandin is working on a (somewhat different)
re-hash of the note storage thing in his tree - worth not treading on
his feet there; but of course the more unit tests for note stuff the
merrier.
ATB,
Michael.
--
[email protected] <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
