Subject: Re: Proposal for unittests

Re: Proposal for unittests

From: Patrick Valsecchi <pvalsecc_at_cisco.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 09:03:00 +0200

On 04/29/2013 08:42 AM, Marko Kreen wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 08:13:38AM +0200, Patrick Valsecchi wrote:
>> No need of external dependency. That's the beauty of the thing. You
>> just drop 3 files in the test directory (AllTests.c, CuTest.c,
>> CuTest.h) and you're all set.
>>
>> I don't think a test framework needs to be fancy. It must just avoid
>> being in the way. That is the simplest I've found.
>
> Nick Mathewson's "tinytest" has similar property:
>
> https://github.com/libevent/libevent/tree/master/test
>
> It's just following files you can drop into your tree:
>
> tinytest.[ch] + tinytest_macros.h
>
> By quick look, it even seems to have cuter api - no camelcase,
> shorter symbols and fewer of them. But that's a matter of taste.
>

Yes it looks prettier and has the advantage of being able to run a
single test out of the box. OK, I'll switch to this one if it's OK for
the others.
Received on 2013-04-29