[TIP] alphabetical order in testing

[Olemis Lang]

On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 9:52 AM, C. Titus Brown <ctb at msu.edu> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 09:12:29AM -0500, Olemis Lang wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 5:42 AM, holger krekel <holger at merlinux.eu> wrote:
>> > Some way of telling a test runner to consider tests in a certain
>> > order makes sense to me, though.
>> >
>> > In fact, I had user requests and own thoughts to allow declaring dependencies -
>> > such that if a test fails subsequent ones would not be run anymore.
>>
>> Probably (I don't know the exact details ;o), but if the first test
>> fails that (should ?) means that something is not right (i.e. behaving
>> like expected) with the SUT .
>
> Olemis, et al. -- independence of test order is generally considered a
> requirement for unit tests, but not for other tests (functional, UI, etc.)
> where it simply wouldn't make sense.
>
> If we're going to be dogmatic, let's be specific in our dogmatism, too :)
>

I don't know what would I've become if Titus wasn't suscribed to this
list . That was an assumption I made but didn't say explicitly.

I'll worship at your altar ! Damn it !

>> Anyway : be pragmatic ! ... and be aware of the consequences ;o)
>
> I think we can count on Holger to be aware of the consequences!
>

... without needing a hammer .

XD

-- 
Regards,

Olemis.

Blog ES: http://simelo-es.blogspot.com/
Blog EN: http://simelo-en.blogspot.com/

Featured article:
Now `dutest` 1.2.3 is easy_install-able o  -
http://flioops.hg.sourceforge.net/hgweb/flioops/dutest/rev/0b5edb8a1e26