Eli Zaretskii 7c848fe572 Make temporary file in coding.test work on MS-Windows. 10 rokov pred
..
lalr fb01fd8772 remove duplicate when/unless definitions 13 rokov pred
standalone 4afca1a066 test-guild-compile: Increase sleep time before sending SIGINT. 10 rokov pred
test-suite f089330846 tests: Improve lack-of-/dev/null detection. 10 rokov pred
tests 7c848fe572 Make temporary file in coding.test work on MS-Windows. 10 rokov pred
vm 83dce818ec GUILE_INSTALL_LOCALE=1 during build 12 rokov pred
ChangeLog-2008 afb59d75b8 Rename `ChangeLog' files to `ChangeLog-2008'. 16 rokov pred
Makefile.am d5f7b6678f Add missing files to the test-suite Makefile. 11 rokov pred
README 88f5ea45d5 Revert "Note need for subscription to bug-guile@gnu.org." 16 rokov pred
guile-test d0a77f10f2 Fix improper use of 'with-locale'. 11 rokov pred

README

This directory contains some tests for Guile, and some generic test
support code.

To run these tests, you will need a version of Guile more recent than
15 Feb 1999 --- the tests use the (ice-9 and-let*) and (ice-9
getopt-long) modules, which were added to Guile around then.

For information about how to run the test suite, read the usage
instructions in the comments at the top of the guile-test script.

You can reference the file `lib.scm' from your own code as the module
(test-suite lib); it also has comments at the top and before each
function explaining what's going on.

Please write more Guile tests, and send them to bug-guile@gnu.org.
We'll merge them into the distribution. All test suites must be
licensed for our use under the GPL, but I don't think I'm going to
collect assignment papers for them.



Some test suite philosophy:

GDB has an extensive test suite --- around 6300 tests. Every time the
test suite catches a bug, it's great.

GDB is so complicated that folks are often unable to get a solid
understanding of the code before making a change --- we just don't
have time. You'll see people say things like, "Here's a fix for X; it
doesn't cause any regressions." The subtext is, I made a change that
looks reasonable, and the test suite didn't complain, so it must be
okay.

I think this is terrible, because it suggests that the writer is using
the test suite as a substitute for having a rock-solid explanation of
why their changes are correct. The problem is that any test suite is
woefully incomplete. Diligent reasoning about code can catch corner
conditions or limitations that no test suite will ever find.



Jim's rule for test suites:

Every test suite failure should be a complete, mysterious surprise,
never a possibility you were prepared for. Any other attitude
indicates that you're using the test suite as a crutch, which you need
only because your understanding is weak.