[fpc-devel] Definition of the time-fration in a TDateTime before 30/12/1899

[Florian Klaempfl]

Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
> 
> 
> On Tue, 23 May 2006, Florian Klaempfl wrote:
> 
>> Peter Vreman wrote:
>>>> Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 1. fpcunit didn't exist at the time the FPC tests were
>>>>>>>>> implemented.
>>>>>>>>> 2. Using FPCunit creates a dependency on it. The tests can run
>>>>>>>>> mostly
>>>>>>>>>    with only the system unit...
>>>>>>>> Which dependencies? Maybe they can be reduced and a fpcunit can be
>>>>>>>> added to tests?
>>>>>>> fpcunit depends on not so much, but I want to avoid using the FCL in
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> testsuite... Creating a copy seems rather silly too...
>>>>>> You can create an svn:external to important that one from the fcl
>>>>>> without
>>>>>> creating a real copy.
>>>>> Good idea.
>>>>>
>>>>> Should we convert existing tests to fpcunit ?
>>>> No, too much work, no real gain :)
>>>
>>> I agree here. New tests can be added with fpcunit. But the basic
>>> principe
>>> of using the halt and the dotest program needs to stay in place.
>>
>> I see no problem to execute "high" level tests using fpcunit. Maybe we
>> need to
>> redesign our tests structure a little bit because with the current
>> test system
>> we can't test fcl, packages and friends.
> 
> If we want to do this, there are 2 options:
> 
> 1. Include the test programs with the packages/fcl/rtl whatever.
> 2. Use a completely separate test directory, as it is now.
> 
> Personally, I am slightly in favour of 2, because 1 will require
> us to put the fpcunit in the RTL. 1. will require a more thorough
> rewrite of the test suite...

Either:
tests can be modelled after fpc/ i.e. containing also rtl/fcl/packages etc.
tests go in each dir

With some more makefile magic testing can be limited either to rtl/compiler or
extended to everything.

I'am quite sure that fpcunit based tests can be easily extended to return an
error level <>0 in case of an error so they fit into the current testsuite. In
the worst case we add some postprocessor program checking all xml output and
writing the errors and exiting with 1. Maybe dotest could be even extended with
little effort to parse the xml output of a test which is marked with e.g. %XML
and write appropriate info to the logs.

We don't perfect metrics for the fcl/packages how good/bad our implementation is
but simply information what's broken and what not.