I don't have any unit tests in my tree yet, so feel free to go ahead. -- Noel Grandin
Kevin Hunter wrote: > At 4:47pm -0500 Thu, 08 Dec 2011, Michael Meeks wrote: >> On Thu, 2011-12-08 at 13:05 -0500, Kevin Hunter wrote: >>> 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. > > Oh! I didn't realize cppunit was open for hacking from our end. Let's see > ... looking through that directory then > ... the basic workflow is to write a patch to apply before we compile > Cppunit, yes? > >> 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. > > Cheers. If Noel is working on that, then I'll turn my attention to something > along the test lines. Given my > $REAL_LIFE constraints, maybe what I work on should fall farther from the LO > critical path ... > > Thanks, > > Kevin > _______________________________________________ > LibreOffice mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice > Disclaimer: http://www.peralex.com/disclaimer.html
_______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
