Re: [DUnit-interest] DUnit re-write update.

[Peter M. <mc...@me...>]

Kris Golko wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I wouldn't put it better myself.
>
> Cheers
>
> --- "Jud Cole (SOCK Software)"
> <ju...@us...> wrote:
>
>   
>> Peter,
>>
>> Yes, agreed, I hope that you are feeling better
>> also.
>>
>> This will hopefully prompt me into action as well.
>>
>> All the best,
>>
>> Jud
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: dun...@li...
>>
>>     
> [mailto:dun...@li...]
>   
>> On Behalf Of Juancarlo
>> Añez
>>
>> Peter,
>>
>> Thanks for the update!
>>
>> I hope you're feeling better.
>>
>> Juanca 
>>
>>     

Thanks for your wishes guys.

FYI

I have had a spurt of enthusiasm (to the detriment of everything else) 
for the past week to get the code stable and functioning as designed.
A bug exposed when two listeners were registered simultaneously has been 
fixed this weekend..
In parallel I have been using CodeHealer 2.5 and Pascal Analyser 4 to 
tighten up the code and try to get some semblance of consistency in the 
disparate units.

The Object Persistence Framework  project on Sourceforge called tiOPF 
now uses DUnit2. The originator is an absolute gentleman also from 
Melbourne.
Peter H uses dunit extensively to manage the project and has expressed 
an interest in fostering the new code to the point it can be used not 
only for tiOPF2 but also his production code. At present I only compile 
as high as D2006 and anticipate Peter will be updating aspects that 
currently generate warnings under D2007.

After our joint efforts are merged and the code tidying up has settled 
down I hope to again notify the duint-interest list.
At that point I hope some clever souls can have a play and see whether 
the code is going to be suitable as a basis for further official 
development.

Aspects not completed are the upgrade to GUITesting unit tests, 
primarily because the suite registration process changed significantly 
and I didn't have time, at the time, to implement a solution.

I started coding to add some built in rather than built on BDD support.
The idea is that individual unit test suites can contain setup and 
validation code and support multiple testcases and optionally multiple 
BDD statements per testcase.

Work has not commenced on multi-threading the projects.

Nothing has been done to add a listener type which can save test 
execution results and times for comparison with prior results.
The XMLListener with changes might lend itself to that cause.

Eventually I had planned to dispense with the intermediate proxy units 
and completely replace the current GUI and Text TestRunners with new 
ones to interface directly with the lower layers for the desired speed 
enhancement, but thats another story.

So there is plenty that could be done to add new value and ease of use 
to dunit.

Hoping to hear from you.

Peterm