Re: [QGIT RFC] Unit tests for QGit

From: Jan Hudec <bulb@ucw.cz>
Date: Aug 10, 2008, 07:55 UTC
Message-ID: <20080810075557.GA3955@efreet.light.src>
In-Reply-To: <1621f9fa0808081600i51bcaaedtc22a7a85947ba400@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Aug 08, 2008 at 16:00:57 -0700, Benjamin Sergeant wrote:

Show 13 quoted lines

> On Fri, Aug 8, 2008 at 2:13 PM, Jan Hudec <bulb@ucw.cz> wrote:
> > I've been thinking about some refactoring of QGit since some time. And to be
> > sure I don't screw up things too hard in the process, I thought about adding
> > a test suite infrastructure first (and add some test cases for each think
> > just before refactoring it).
> >
> > The problem is, that implementing unittests means I need to compile
> > 2 separate binaries -- qgit itself and the test -- using most (but not all)
> > of the same sources. I see two ways to do it, so I'd like to ask which you
> > consider cleaner:
> > [...]
> 
> Maybe you can have a look at QTestLib. But it won't solve your

Sure I did. Unfortunately they don't suggest any good way to handle your build process with it in their examples. Seems to me they never tried testing an application with it.

I plan to go down the QTestLib route. Maybe it could be combined with LDTP[1] for blackbox testing -- they claim to be able to use Qt 4's accessibility to control an application.

> buildsystem issues. You'll need one .pro per test. (I have one .pro
> per test plus one directory per test). There's probably other ways to
> using it.

Depends on what you call a test. But generally there should be no reason to have more than one .pro file for all tests. You just need to manually maintain a list of test classes or create some kind of static instance self-registration (which I did).

> http://doc.trolltech.com/4.4/qtestlib-manual.html#qtestlib

[1] http://ldtp.freedesktop.org/

-- 
						 Jan 'Bulb' Hudec <bulb@ucw.cz>