cppunit-devel

[Cppunit-devel] CppUnit 1.7.8 tar ball

[Baptiste L. <gai...@fr...>]

    I finally took the time to go over some patches and features requests.
It is now possible to compile CppUnit as a DLL, and the MFC TestRunner in
Unicode.

    The tar ball are available at the following location:

http://gaiacrtn.free.fr/cppunit/cppunit-1.7.8.tar.gz
http://gaiacrtn.free.fr/cppunit/cppunit-docs-1.7.8.tar.gz

    I need somebody to tell me if thing are OK on the Unix side.

    If no major issue is raised, I think I'll go for a public release (It's
been far too long since the last one).

    Baptiste.
---
Baptiste Lepilleur <gai...@fr...>
http://gaiacrtn.free.fr/

Re: [Cppunit-devel] CppUnit 1.7.8 tar ball

[Robert W. <ro...@po...>]

On Tue, Mar 26, 2002 at 09:30:12PM +0100, Baptiste Lepilleur wrote:

>     The tar ball are available at the following location:
> 
> http://gaiacrtn.free.fr/cppunit/cppunit-1.7.8.tar.gz
> http://gaiacrtn.free.fr/cppunit/cppunit-docs-1.7.8.tar.gz
> 
Huh? 1.7.8? I got the CVS version on Monday or Tuesday and its change log
claims to be 1.7.9?

>     I need somebody to tell me if thing are OK on the Unix side.
I don't have exhaustive test cases yet.
Better documentation would help getting things working.
At some points the JUnit (API) documentation does not suffice.
Anyway: sounds a little strange to release a testing frame work without
proper test cases?
 
>     If no major issue is raised, I think I'll go for a public release (It's
> been far too long since the last one).
At least you should IMHO state on the Sourceforge download page that
the CVS version may be somewhat more recently released. I used to work with
1.6.2 some time and now have to change my code to reflect the existance of the 
SourceLine class. 

Robert

Re: [Cppunit-devel] CppUnit 1.7.8 tar ball

[Baptiste L. <gai...@fr...>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Wenner" <ro...@po...>
To: "Baptiste Lepilleur" <gai...@fr...>
Cc: <cpp...@li...>
Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 9:14 AM
Subject: Re: [Cppunit-devel] CppUnit 1.7.8 tar ball


> On Tue, Mar 26, 2002 at 09:30:12PM +0100, Baptiste Lepilleur wrote:
>
> >     The tar ball are available at the following location:
> >
> > http://gaiacrtn.free.fr/cppunit/cppunit-1.7.8.tar.gz
> > http://gaiacrtn.free.fr/cppunit/cppunit-docs-1.7.8.tar.gz
> >
> Huh? 1.7.8? I got the CVS version on Monday or Tuesday and its change log
> claims to be 1.7.9?

Even number version are used for release (I messed up with 1.7.3, it should
have been 1.7.4), odd version for current CVS. Any change done in the CVS
repository from now will be for 1.7.10. The snapshot was done Monday.

>
> >     I need somebody to tell me if thing are OK on the Unix side.
> I don't have exhaustive test cases yet.

Do you mean that you have trouble compiling the test suite
examples/cppunittest ?

> Better documentation would help getting things working.

Yes, I intend to revisit the cookbook and explain stuffs like helper macros,
compiler outputter for post build check...

> At some points the JUnit (API) documentation does not suffice.

I was thinking of adding a general architecture overview page (creating test
fixture, writing test, creating test suite, testing, tracking test result,
and writing test result)

> Anyway: sounds a little strange to release a testing frame work without
> proper test cases?

Huuh, what are you talking about ? CppUnit TestCase are in
examples/cppunittest. Are you refering to something else ?

Beyond that, it is a GO ? What platform are you using ? Volker Boerchers is
having trouble compiling on Linux.

Baptiste.

Re: [Cppunit-devel] CppUnit 1.7.8 tar ball

[Robert W. <ro...@po...>]

On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 11:31:13AM +0100, Baptiste Lepilleur wrote:
> 
> Do you mean that you have trouble compiling the test suite
> examples/cppunittest ?
No, I only had to get the latest version of autoconf.
See below.
 
> I was thinking of adding a general architecture overview page (creating test
> fixture, writing test, creating test suite, testing, tracking test result,
> and writing test result)
I would really appreciate that.
Especially some clear statements on how to do this or that and what classes
are deprecated, e.g. how do I format the text output (subclass
TestListener).

> Huuh, what are you talking about ? CppUnit TestCase are in
> examples/cppunittest. Are you refering to something else ?
I guess I used the make test.
What kind of other tests on Unix did you think about?
 
> Beyond that, it is a GO ? What platform are you using ? Volker Boerchers is
> having trouble compiling on Linux.
Linux version 2.4.7-10 (bhc...@st...) (gcc version
2.96 20000731 (Red Hat Linux 7.1 2.96-98)) #1 Thu Sep 6 17:27:27 EDT 2001
I remember that you have to execute the autogen.sh script but this is not
mentioned in the INSTALL file. I think I used these commands after
installing autoconf 2.53 (take care, this goes to /usr/local/bin while the
old version from /usr/bin may be found first, check $PATH):
/usr/bin/autoconf
./autogen.sh
./configure
/usr/bin/make
/usr/bin/make test 
and as root /usr/bin/make install


Robert

Re: [Cppunit-devel] CppUnit 1.7.8 tar ball

[Baptiste L. <gai...@fr...>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Wenner" <ro...@po...>
To: "Baptiste Lepilleur" <gai...@fr...>
Cc: <cpp...@li...>
Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 11:56 AM
Subject: Re: [Cppunit-devel] CppUnit 1.7.8 tar ball


> On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 11:31:13AM +0100, Baptiste Lepilleur wrote:
[...]
> > Huuh, what are you talking about ? CppUnit TestCase are in
> > examples/cppunittest. Are you refering to something else ?
> I guess I used the make test.
> What kind of other tests on Unix did you think about?

Hum, I think it's make check.

> > Beyond that, it is a GO ? What platform are you using ? Volker Boerchers
is
> > having trouble compiling on Linux.
> Linux version 2.4.7-10 (bhc...@st...) (gcc version
> 2.96 20000731 (Red Hat Linux 7.1 2.96-98)) #1 Thu Sep 6 17:27:27 EDT 2001
> I remember that you have to execute the autogen.sh script but this is not
> mentioned in the INSTALL file. I think I used these commands after

Would adding reamme.CVS and the steps you specified below to INSTALL-unix be
enough ?

Baptiste.

> installing autoconf 2.53 (take care, this goes to /usr/local/bin while the
> old version from /usr/bin may be found first, check $PATH):
> /usr/bin/autoconf
> ./autogen.sh
> ./configure
> /usr/bin/make
> /usr/bin/make test
> and as root /usr/bin/make install
>
>
> Robert
>

Re: [Cppunit-devel] CppUnit 1.7.8 tar ball

[Robert W. <ro...@po...>]

> Would adding reamme.CVS and the steps you specified below to INSTALL-unix=
 be
> enough ?
>=20
> Baptiste.

=46rom my point of view: yes (after verifying it works that way).

Robert

Re: [Cppunit-devel] CppUnit 1.7.8 tar ball

[Steve M. R. <ste...@vi...>]

On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 12:20:55PM +0100, Baptiste Lepilleur wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Robert Wenner" <ro...@po...>
> To: "Baptiste Lepilleur" <gai...@fr...>
> Cc: <cpp...@li...>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 11:56 AM
> Subject: Re: [Cppunit-devel] CppUnit 1.7.8 tar ball
> 
> 
> > On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 11:31:13AM +0100, Baptiste Lepilleur wrote:
> [...]
> > > Huuh, what are you talking about ? CppUnit TestCase are in
> > > examples/cppunittest. Are you refering to something else ?
> > I guess I used the make test.
> > What kind of other tests on Unix did you think about?
> 
> Hum, I think it's make check.

Yes, "make check".

 
> > > Beyond that, it is a GO ? What platform are you using ? Volker Boerchers
> is
> > > having trouble compiling on Linux.
> > Linux version 2.4.7-10 (bhc...@st...) (gcc version
> > 2.96 20000731 (Red Hat Linux 7.1 2.96-98)) #1 Thu Sep 6 17:27:27 EDT 2001
> > I remember that you have to execute the autogen.sh script but this is not
> > mentioned in the INSTALL file. I think I used these commands after
> 
> Would adding reamme.CVS and the steps you specified below to INSTALL-unix be
> enough ?

NONONONO!  Don't do that.

That is named README.CVS because it pertains to the CVS files, which
have "developer mode" stuff in the Makefiles.

When done properly, the released Makefiles need no treatment using
the autotools.


-- 
by Rocket to the Moon,
by Airplane to the Rocket,
by Taxi to the Airport,
by Frontdoor to the Taxi,
by throwing back the blanket and laying down the legs ...
- They Might Be Giants

Re: [Cppunit-devel] CppUnit 1.7.8 tar ball

[Baptiste L. <gai...@fr...>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve M. Robbins" <ste...@vi...>
To: "Baptiste Lepilleur" <gai...@fr...>
Cc: "Robert Wenner" <ro...@po...>;
<cpp...@li...>
Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 3:21 PM
Subject: Re: [Cppunit-devel] CppUnit 1.7.8 tar ball

[...]

> > Would adding reamme.CVS and the steps you specified below to
INSTALL-unix be
> > enough ?
>
> NONONONO!  Don't do that.
>
> That is named README.CVS because it pertains to the CVS files, which
> have "developer mode" stuff in the Makefiles.
>
> When done properly, the released Makefiles need no treatment using
> the autotools.

Yes, Volker pointed it out, there is no ./autogen.sh in the tarball... I'll
just add a line "if you're building from CVS, read readme.CVS" to
INSTALL-unix, and the fact you need to do ./autogen.sh in readme.CVS.

Baptiste.

Re: [Cppunit-devel] CppUnit 1.7.8 tar ball

[Steve M. R. <ste...@vi...>]

On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 03:54:07PM +0100, Baptiste Lepilleur wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Steve M. Robbins" <ste...@vi...>
> To: "Baptiste Lepilleur" <gai...@fr...>
> Cc: "Robert Wenner" <ro...@po...>;
> <cpp...@li...>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 3:21 PM
> Subject: Re: [Cppunit-devel] CppUnit 1.7.8 tar ball
> 
> [...]
> 
> > > Would adding reamme.CVS and the steps you specified below to
> INSTALL-unix be
> > > enough ?
> >
> > NONONONO!  Don't do that.
> >
> > That is named README.CVS because it pertains to the CVS files, which
> > have "developer mode" stuff in the Makefiles.
> >
> > When done properly, the released Makefiles need no treatment using
> > the autotools.
> 
> Yes, Volker pointed it out, there is no ./autogen.sh in the tarball...

That is correct.  Neither autogen.sh nor README.CVS should be in
the tarball.


> I'll
> just add a line "if you're building from CVS, read readme.CVS" to
> INSTALL-unix,

Okay ... but that is a little confusing: if you get the tar
distribution, you will not have any README.CVS file (nor do you need
it).

Generally speaking, one expects that someone using CVS is competent
enough to read README.CVS.  I thought the confusion stemmed from
tar'ing up the CVS sources without properly generating the
distribution makefiles.  ?


> and the fact you need to do ./autogen.sh in readme.CVS.

That is already there.

-S


-- 
by Rocket to the Moon,
by Airplane to the Rocket,
by Taxi to the Airport,
by Frontdoor to the Taxi,
by throwing back the blanket and laying down the legs ...
- They Might Be Giants

Re: [Cppunit-devel] TODO Documentation

[Baptiste L. <gai...@fr...>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Wenner" <ro...@po...>
To: "Baptiste Lepilleur" <gai...@fr...>
Cc: <cpp...@li...>
Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 11:56 AM
Subject: Re: [Cppunit-devel] CppUnit 1.7.8 tar ball


> On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 11:31:13AM +0100, Baptiste Lepilleur wrote:
[...]
> > I was thinking of adding a general architecture overview page (creating
test
> > fixture, writing test, creating test suite, testing, tracking test
result,
> > and writing test result)
> I would really appreciate that.
> Especially some clear statements on how to do this or that and what
classes
> are deprecated, e.g. how do I format the text output (subclass
> TestListener).

Can you specify "this or that" ? I'll make a TODO list, and hopefully will
be able to explain some (not that the NEWS file contains some info).

current TODO:
CookBook:
    C1- update to use CppUnit namespace
    C2- update to use TextTestRunner
    C3- introduce helper macros to create a test suite
    C4- introduce helper macros to automatically register test suite
    C5- introduce compiler outputter and post-build check

CppUnit:
    CP- general architecture overview

Baptiste.

Re: [Cppunit-devel] TODO Documentation

[Baptiste L. <gai...@fr...>]

Can you look at http://gaiacrtn.free.fr/cppunit/index.html and let me know
if you find the GUI and the creatin test case/ways of macros description
clear enough ? (they need update but the basic haven't changed since then).

See below.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Wenner" <ro...@po...>
To: "Baptiste Lepilleur" <gai...@fr...>
Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 1:26 PM
Subject: Re: [Cppunit-devel] TODO Documentation


> On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 12:25:06PM +0100, Baptiste Lepilleur wrote:
>
> > Can you specify "this or that" ? I'll make a TODO list, and hopefully
will
> > be able to explain some (not that the NEWS file contains some info).
> In the cookbook I would put
> - how to create simple test cases (with CppUnit namespace)
>   - test case using only CPPUINT_ASSERT
>   - test case using CPPUNIT_ASSERT_EQUAL
>   - advanced assertions with the CPPUNIT_ASSERT_MESSAGE

- creating custom assertions using Asserter. (or should I put this at the
end ?)

> - Helper Macros for convenience
> - Creating a suite
> - Composing a suite from more suits (i.e. compose tests for n modules to
>   form a big test for the whole program)
> - customizing output using an user defined TestListener
>   - how to write the TestListener (subclass of TestListener)
>   - how to hook it in
> - how to use the GUI
>   - MSVC++ special stuff
> - other custmization stuff I haven't understood yet

That layout looks good to me. You I keep the current cookbook, or scrap some
of it (subclassing TestCase for example ?)

>
> Class documentation would also be helpful, I think it's hard for a
> beginner to distinguish between TestResult, TestListener and
> TestRunner and where to subclass for what reason.

From what I read below, it's seems that you are indeed refering to
TestResultCollector (TestResult have been splitted in two classes since
1.7.3).

I'm thinking of renaming TestResult to TestController. It's managing the
TestListener, and in the short future, it'll provide a way to
protected/decorate and test (for timing, COM initialization, and specific
exception capture). Would that help ?

> As far as I understand TestResult does have to be the base class for
> defining a fourth condition aside Success, Failure, and Error.
> TestListener would be to process test results (e.g.
> pretty printing, handing them to another program, ...).

In the current version, TestResultCollector is a TestListener. TestResult no
longer holds the result of a test run.

> TestRunner would be subclassed for e.g. adding a Method to be called
> once for the whole test process. (And TestSuite would be subclassed to
> define methods to be called before and after the Suite / Fixture. Or
> do you inherit from TextFixture for that?).

I guess you would have to subclass TestSuite to do that. Though is
"dangerous" since that setUp()/tearDown() would not be called when executing
a single test case with the GUI.

>
> BTW is there some kind of CPPUNIT_FAIL or do you have to use
> CPPUNIT_ASSERT(0) ?

  There is a CPPUNIT_FAIL, name CPPUNIT_FAIL (amasing, isn't it ?) ;-)

  Check file NEWS for new things you might have missed.

Thanks for your feedback Robert,
Baptiste.

>
> Robert
>

Re: [Cppunit-devel] TODO Documentation

[Robert W. <ro...@po...>]

On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 03:25:07PM +0100, Baptiste Lepilleur wrote:
> Can you look at http://gaiacrtn.free.fr/cppunit/index.html and let me know
> if you find the GUI and the creatin test case/ways of macros description
> clear enough ? (they need update but the basic haven't changed since then).

I remember I had a look at that page, but quickly turned away because
its release number was smaller than that I got (1.5.5 compared to
1.6.2) and it seemed to contain almost only MS Win stuff.

> > In the cookbook I would put
> > - how to create simple test cases (with CppUnit namespace)
> >   - test case using only CPPUINT_ASSERT
> >   - test case using CPPUNIT_ASSERT_EQUAL
> >   - advanced assertions with the CPPUNIT_ASSERT_MESSAGE
> 
> - creating custom assertions using Asserter. (or should I put this at the
> end ?)
Depends on whether this is a newbie question or not.
If it is easy to see why one would create custom assertions I would
place it here. Otherwise at the end.
 
> > - Helper Macros for convenience
Or mention the Builder template here, too.

> > - Creating a suite
> > - Composing a suite from more suits (i.e. compose tests for n modules to
> >   form a big test for the whole program)
> > - customizing output using an user defined TestListener
> >   - how to write the TestListener (subclass of TestListener)
> >   - how to hook it in
> > - how to use the GUI
> >   - MSVC++ special stuff
> > - other custmization stuff I haven't understood yet
> 
> That layout looks good to me. You I keep the current cookbook, or scrap some
> of it (subclassing TestCase for example ?)
The current cookbook is ok, but not enough. :-)
 
> >From what I read below, it's seems that you are indeed refering to
> TestResultCollector (TestResult have been splitted in two classes since
> 1.7.3).
I have problems seeing where to get my own hooks in.
For example: I got some test that may crash the program (segmentation
fault). Thus the TextTestRunner displaying only dots and F or E
does not suffice, I want the name of each test before it is
started and the ok or e or f and the failure information when it
finishes. With that I would see which test crashes the program
(I don't want to rely on counting the dots and counting the
test methods.)
Now I wrote my own TestListener, but can not find where to get it
in. TestCase does not define defaultResult to be virtual so I
can not override it to return a TestResult to which I added
my Listener.
Also confusing: TextTestRunner and the UI Test Runners don't inherit
from TestRunner?


> I'm thinking of renaming TestResult to TestController. It's managing the
> TestListener, and in the short future, it'll provide a way to
> protected/decorate and test (for timing, COM initialization, and specific
> exception capture). Would that help ?
That is one thing, but more important would be IMHO some 3 to 5 
sentences in a brief description what the class is used for. And a hint
on what to customize here. This brief description should not copy
the information already given in the generated documentation.
For TestListener it could be something like this:
"Implementing the Observer pattern a TestListener may be registered
to a TestResult to obtain information on the testing progress. Use
specialized sub classes of TestListener for text output
(TextTestProgressListener). Do not use the Listener for the test
result output, use a subclass of Outputter instead."

Or for the TestResult: "Traverses the test cases in given suits.
This class shouldn't have to be inherited from. Use a TestListener
or one of its subclasses to be informed of the ongoing tests.
Use a Outputter to receive a test summary once it has finished."

[Correct me if I wrong, but you get the idea.]

>   There is a CPPUNIT_FAIL, name CPPUNIT_FAIL (amasing, isn't it ?) ;-)
Ah, thanks, I really missed that one. :-)
Maybe move the descriptions from the NEWS file to the official
documentation, after removing references to the previous release
of cppunit?  

Regards

Robert

Re: [Cppunit-devel] TODO Documentation

[Baptiste L. <gai...@fr...>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Wenner" <ro...@po...>
To: "Baptiste Lepilleur" <gai...@fr...>
Cc: <cpp...@li...>
Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 4:03 PM
Subject: Re: [Cppunit-devel] TODO Documentation


> On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 03:25:07PM +0100, Baptiste Lepilleur wrote:
> > Can you look at http://gaiacrtn.free.fr/cppunit/index.html and let me
know
> > if you find the GUI and the creatin test case/ways of macros description
> > clear enough ? (they need update but the basic haven't changed since
then).
>
> I remember I had a look at that page, but quickly turned away because
> its release number was smaller than that I got (1.5.5 compared to
> 1.6.2) and it seemed to contain almost only MS Win stuff.
Yes, though it's where all the macros and stuff come from.


> > >From what I read below, it's seems that you are indeed refering to
> > TestResultCollector (TestResult have been splitted in two classes since
> > 1.7.3).
> I have problems seeing where to get my own hooks in.
> For example: I got some test that may crash the program (segmentation
> fault). Thus the TextTestRunner displaying only dots and F or E
> does not suffice, I want the name of each test before it is
> started and the ok or e or f and the failure information when it
> finishes. With that I would see which test crashes the program
> (I don't want to rely on counting the dots and counting the
> test methods.)

What you want is a custom TextTestProgressListener. At the current time it's
hardcoded, but I'll add some methods (like setOutputer) to allow simple
customization.

> Now I wrote my own TestListener, but can not find where to get it
> in. TestCase does not define defaultResult to be virtual so I
> can not override it to return a TestResult to which I added
> my Listener.

defaultResult() is not used. It is a leftover of the port from Java.

What you need to change is:
bool
TextTestRunner::runTest( Test *test )
{
  TextTestProgressListener progress;   //  <<<<
  m_eventManager->addListener( &progress );
  test->run( m_eventManager );
  m_eventManager->removeListener( &progress );
  return m_result->wasSuccessful();
}

On the way, I'll also make those protected methods virtual...

> Also confusing: TextTestRunner and the UI Test Runners don't inherit
> from TestRunner?

What is TestRunner ?

> > I'm thinking of renaming TestResult to TestController. It's managing the
> > TestListener, and in the short future, it'll provide a way to
> > protected/decorate and test (for timing, COM initialization, and
specific
> > exception capture). Would that help ?
> That is one thing, but more important would be IMHO some 3 to 5
> sentences in a brief description what the class is used for. And a hint
> on what to customize here. This brief description should not copy
> the information already given in the generated documentation.
> For TestListener it could be something like this:
> "Implementing the Observer pattern a TestListener may be registered
> to a TestResult to obtain information on the testing progress. Use
> specialized sub classes of TestListener for text output
> (TextTestProgressListener). Do not use the Listener for the test
> result output, use a subclass of Outputter instead."
Sound good. Mind if I copy that ?

> Or for the TestResult: "Traverses the test cases in given suits.
> This class shouldn't have to be inherited from. Use a TestListener
> or one of its subclasses to be informed of the ongoing tests.
> Use a Outputter to receive a test summary once it has finished."
Good, though TestResult does not actually traverse, it's TestSuite.

> [Correct me if I wrong, but you get the idea.]
Yups.

> >   There is a CPPUNIT_FAIL, name CPPUNIT_FAIL (amasing, isn't it ?) ;-)
> Ah, thanks, I really missed that one. :-)
> Maybe move the descriptions from the NEWS file to the official
> documentation, after removing references to the previous release
> of cppunit?

Do you means having something like:

CppUnit Features:
------------------

* Assertion:
CPPUNIT_ASSERT
CPPUNIT_FAIL
...

* Composing TestFixture:
CPPUNIT_TEST_SUITE
CPPUNIT_TEST_EXCEPTION
...

* GUI:
MfcTestRunner
QtTestRuner
TextTestRuner
...

Well, you get the idea.

Baptiste.

Re: [Cppunit-devel] TODO Documentation

[Robert W. <ro...@po...>]

On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 04:46:02PM +0100, Baptiste Lepilleur wrote:

> What you want is a custom TextTestProgressListener. At the current time it's
> hardcoded, but I'll add some methods (like setOutputer) to allow simple
> customization.

Ah, I would expect this to be customizable.
Or at least I'd expect it to be documented if it's not.
 
> defaultResult() is not used. It is a leftover of the port from Java.
Again, this should be documented.
 
> > Also confusing: TextTestRunner and the UI Test Runners don't inherit
> > from TestRunner?
> 
> What is TestRunner ?
I found a non abstract class named TestRunner in the class hierarchy.

> Sound good. Mind if I copy that ?
If you like it and it's correct feel free to take it.

> Do you means having something like:
> 
> CppUnit Features:
> ------------------
> [...]
 
Almost. I thought of more than a plain features list.
For example the documentation for the TextTestRunner seems not up to date,
it refers to a TestResult argument, not to an Outputter. Just copy the
comments on the TextTestRunner from NEWS to source (to generate the
documentation).
Similar for TestResult, except you got an FIXME comment with that
description.


Robert

Re: [Cppunit-devel] Custom progress with TextTestRunner

[Baptiste L. <gai...@fr...>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Wenner" <ro...@po...>
To: "Baptiste Lepilleur" <gai...@fr...>
Cc: <cpp...@li...>
Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 5:11 PM
Subject: Re: [Cppunit-devel] TODO Documentation


> On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 04:46:02PM +0100, Baptiste Lepilleur wrote:
>
> > What you want is a custom TextTestProgressListener. At the current time
it's
> > hardcoded, but I'll add some methods (like setOutputer) to allow simple
> > customization.

Hum, actually you can already do that (forgot that I exposed the
eventManager to do that):
  CppUnit::TextTestRunner runner;
  runner.addTest( CppUnitTest::suite() );   // Add the top suite to the test
runner
  runner.eventManager().addListener( &myProgress );        // your progress
indicator

  runner.run(...)

=> the TextTestProgressListener would still be used, but called your
listener (since it was registered first). I'll just add an option to make it
optional.

Baptiste.

Re: [Cppunit-devel] Custom progress with TextTestRunner

[Robert W. <ro...@po...>]

On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 05:41:54PM +0100, Baptiste Lepilleur wrote:

> Hum, actually you can already do that (forgot that I exposed the
> eventManager to do that):
>   CppUnit::TextTestRunner runner;
>   runner.addTest( CppUnitTest::suite() );   // Add the top suite to the test
> runner
>   runner.eventManager().addListener( &myProgress );        // your progress
> indicator
> 
>   runner.run(...)
> 
> => the TextTestProgressListener would still be used, but called your
> listener (since it was registered first). I'll just add an option to make it
> optional.
> 

Unfortunately this does not work as expected.
Adding my own listener as described above results in mixed output from
my listener and TextTestProgressListener as in 
bool CppUnit::TextTestRunner::runTest(Test *test) with each call to 
this method a new TextTestProgressListener is created, added to the
list of listeners and after the test removed. :-(
No way to avoid this without modifying the source.

Why is it done this way? Isn't that a somewhat tight coupling between
the TestRunner and one of its Listeners? Isn't TextTestRunner
actually a misnomer? IMHO there should be exactly one kind of
TestRunner but it would be independent of Text, GUI or
whatever and its Listeners and ResultCollectors would take care of
displaying and such.


Robert

Re: [Cppunit-devel] CppUnit 1.7.8 tar ball

[Volker B. <vbo...@te...>]

On Tue, 26 Mar 2002, Baptiste Lepilleur wrote:

>     I finally took the time to go over some patches and features requests=
=2E
> It is now possible to compile CppUnit as a DLL, and the MFC TestRunner in
> Unicode.
>=20
>     The tar ball are available at the following location:
>=20
> http://gaiacrtn.free.fr/cppunit/cppunit-1.7.8.tar.gz
> http://gaiacrtn.free.fr/cppunit/cppunit-docs-1.7.8.tar.gz
>=20
>     I need somebody to tell me if thing are OK on the Unix side.

I encountered problems with a missing 'config/depcomp' file, see
attachment.

some machine information:
 - Linux 2.2.16 #1 Wed Aug 2 20:03:33 GMT 2000 i686 unknown
 - g++ 2.95.2
 - Autoconf version 2.13 (shouldn't matter, but...)

Regards,
Volker
--=20
Volker Boerchers <vbo...@te...>
System Engineer
TECON Systems AG, Perlengraben 2, 50676 K=F6ln, http://www.tecon.de
Tel: +49-221-92007-55, Fax: +49-221-92007-77

Re: [Cppunit-devel] CppUnit 1.7.8 tar ball

[Baptiste L. <gai...@fr...>]

>  - Autoconf version 2.13 (shouldn't matter, but...)

It might: from readme.CVS:
<<
to generate the configure script, you need several auxiliary
tools.  The version numbers are minimal: later versions should
also work.

 autoconf 2.50
 - see http://www.gnu.org/directory/autoconf.html

 automake 1.4
 - see http://www.gnu.org/directory/automake.html

 libtool 1.4
 - see http://www.gnu.org/directory/libtool.html
>>

Other than that, I can't really help (I only have a general idea of how
configure works). Does somebody have a clue as to the origin of the problem
?

Baptiste.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Volker Boerchers" <vbo...@te...>
To: "Baptiste Lepilleur" <gai...@fr...>
Cc: <cpp...@li...>
Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 9:13 AM
Subject: Re: [Cppunit-devel] CppUnit 1.7.8 tar ball


On Tue, 26 Mar 2002, Baptiste Lepilleur wrote:

>     I finally took the time to go over some patches and features requests.
> It is now possible to compile CppUnit as a DLL, and the MFC TestRunner in
> Unicode.
>
>     The tar ball are available at the following location:
>
> http://gaiacrtn.free.fr/cppunit/cppunit-1.7.8.tar.gz
> http://gaiacrtn.free.fr/cppunit/cppunit-docs-1.7.8.tar.gz
>
>     I need somebody to tell me if thing are OK on the Unix side.

I encountered problems with a missing 'config/depcomp' file, see
attachment.

some machine information:
 - Linux 2.2.16 #1 Wed Aug 2 20:03:33 GMT 2000 i686 unknown
 - g++ 2.95.2
 - Autoconf version 2.13 (shouldn't matter, but...)

Regards,
Volker
--
Volker Boerchers <vbo...@te...>
System Engineer
TECON Systems AG, Perlengraben 2, 50676 Köln, http://www.tecon.de
Tel: +49-221-92007-55, Fax: +49-221-92007-77

Re: [Cppunit-devel] CppUnit 1.7.8 tar ball

[Volker B. <vbo...@te...>]

On Wed, 27 Mar 2002, Baptiste Lepilleur wrote:

> >  - Autoconf version 2.13 (shouldn't matter, but...)
>=20
> It might: from readme.CVS:
> <<
> to generate the configure script, you need several auxiliary
> tools.  The version numbers are minimal: later versions should
> also work.
>=20
>  autoconf 2.50
>  - see http://www.gnu.org/directory/autoconf.html

autoconf generates configure from configure.in . Since this happens while
preparing the distribution - and the generated configure is part of the
distribution - it should not matter. (It's the aim of the autotools to
increase portability...)

The configure script (line 1384) contains a dependency to a file that is
not part of the distribution, config/depcomp. If you have it, you could
try to add it to the EXTRA_DIST variable in the toplevel Makefile.am and
see if it is part of the distribution then.

Unfortunately i don't have the new autoXXX-versions installed so i can not
run autogen.sh for myself.

Best Regards
Volker
--=20
Volker Boerchers <vbo...@te...>
System Engineer
TECON Systems AG, Perlengraben 2, 50676 K=F6ln, http://www.tecon.de
Tel: +49-221-92007-55, Fax: +49-221-92007-77

Re: [Cppunit-devel] CppUnit 1.7.8 tar ball

[Baptiste L. <gai...@fr...>]

Attached is the missing depcomp file (from 1.6.2 release). Let me know if it
works with that file.

I'll try to see when that file disappeared from CVS...

Thanks,
Baptiste.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Volker Boerchers" <vbo...@te...>
To: "Baptiste Lepilleur" <gai...@fr...>
Cc: <cpp...@li...>
Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 1:07 PM
Subject: Re: [Cppunit-devel] CppUnit 1.7.8 tar ball


On Wed, 27 Mar 2002, Baptiste Lepilleur wrote:

> >  - Autoconf version 2.13 (shouldn't matter, but...)
>
> It might: from readme.CVS:
> <<
> to generate the configure script, you need several auxiliary
> tools.  The version numbers are minimal: later versions should
> also work.
>
>  autoconf 2.50
>  - see http://www.gnu.org/directory/autoconf.html

autoconf generates configure from configure.in . Since this happens while
preparing the distribution - and the generated configure is part of the
distribution - it should not matter. (It's the aim of the autotools to
increase portability...)

The configure script (line 1384) contains a dependency to a file that is
not part of the distribution, config/depcomp. If you have it, you could
try to add it to the EXTRA_DIST variable in the toplevel Makefile.am and
see if it is part of the distribution then.

Unfortunately i don't have the new autoXXX-versions installed so i can not
run autogen.sh for myself.

Best Regards
Volker
--
Volker Boerchers <vbo...@te...>
System Engineer
TECON Systems AG, Perlengraben 2, 50676 Köln, http://www.tecon.de
Tel: +49-221-92007-55, Fax: +49-221-92007-77

Re: [Cppunit-devel] CppUnit 1.7.8 tar ball

[Steve M. R. <ste...@vi...>]

On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 02:56:08PM +0100, Baptiste Lepilleur wrote:
> Attached is the missing depcomp file (from 1.6.2 release). Let me know if it
> works with that file.
> 
> I'll try to see when that file disappeared from CVS...

That file should NOT be in CVS.  It is boilerplate code that is
simply copied in by automake.  

It's not clear to me how you made the tarball, Baptiste.  It needs to
be done using "make distcheck" to create the tarball correctly:
several magical things happen to the unix Makefiles at that time.

If you wish, I can generate a tarball.  Let me know.


> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Volker Boerchers" <vbo...@te...>
> To: "Baptiste Lepilleur" <gai...@fr...>
> Cc: <cpp...@li...>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 1:07 PM
> Subject: Re: [Cppunit-devel] CppUnit 1.7.8 tar ball
> 
> 
> On Wed, 27 Mar 2002, Baptiste Lepilleur wrote:
> 
> > >  - Autoconf version 2.13 (shouldn't matter, but...)
> >
> > It might: from readme.CVS:
> > <<
> > to generate the configure script, you need several auxiliary
> > tools.  The version numbers are minimal: later versions should
> > also work.
> >
> >  autoconf 2.50
> >  - see http://www.gnu.org/directory/autoconf.html
> 
> autoconf generates configure from configure.in . Since this happens while
> preparing the distribution - and the generated configure is part of the
> distribution - it should not matter. (It's the aim of the autotools to
> increase portability...)

This is true.  The file README.CVS is for someone working directly
from the CVS sources.  The tarball, if correctly constituted, does
not require any of the autotools.


> The configure script (line 1384) contains a dependency to a file that is
> not part of the distribution, config/depcomp. If you have it, you could
> try to add it to the EXTRA_DIST variable in the toplevel Makefile.am and
> see if it is part of the distribution then.

Don't do this manually.  It's part of the magic that happens during
"make dist".


Regards,
-Steve



-- 
by Rocket to the Moon,
by Airplane to the Rocket,
by Taxi to the Airport,
by Frontdoor to the Taxi,
by throwing back the blanket and laying down the legs ...
- They Might Be Giants

Re: [Cppunit-devel] CppUnit 1.7.8 tar ball

[Baptiste L. <gai...@fr...>]

On the compile farm on a linux box, I did:
./autogen.sh
./configure --prefix=$HOME
make dist
make doc-dist

I just try to do a 'make distcheck', and I get the same error as Volker.
(see attached file, in english that time).

The config/depcomp file does exist...

=> I just found the culprit.

In src/makefile.am:
<<
SUBDIRS = cppunit

# already handled by toplevel dist-hook.
# DIST_SUBDIRS = msvc6

EXTRA_DIST = CppUnitLibraries.dsw
>>

I added the EXTRA_DIST line. If removed, everything is working fine...  What
should I do ? Move it to the top level makefile.am ?

Baptiste.