Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

UnitTesting

Expand Messages
  • Jan-Paul Bultmann
    Hey, I noticed that Self does not have a unit-testing Framework. In Smalltalk test driven development is a fundamental part of the system, at least as far as I
    Message 1 of 6 , Oct 21, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      Hey,
      I noticed that Self does not have a unit-testing Framework.
      In Smalltalk test driven development is a fundamental part of the
      system, at least as far as I know.
      So were there just more important things to do or is this a design
      choice?
      Are unit-tests useless in the self world or is there a better thing
      I'm just missing :)?

      Greets Jan
    • Michael Latta
      The self project was a research project largely completed prior to the automated testing wave of tools like SUnit and such. I believe the lack of a unit
      Message 2 of 6 , Oct 21, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        The self project was a research project largely completed prior to the automated testing wave of tools like SUnit and such. I believe
        the lack of a unit testing framework is just due to its age more than anything else.

        Michael


        On Oct 21, 2010, at 7:27 AM, Jan-Paul Bultmann wrote:

        > Hey,
        > I noticed that Self does not have a unit-testing Framework.
        > In Smalltalk test driven development is a fundamental part of the
        > system, at least as far as I know.
        > So were there just more important things to do or is this a design
        > choice?
        > Are unit-tests useless in the self world or is there a better thing
        > I'm just missing :)?
        >
        > Greets Jan
        >
        >
        > ------------------------------------
        >
        > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
      • Jan-Paul Bultmann
        ... Yeah, I thought of that too. I d be pretty easy to use mock objects simply by exchanging some slots. Greets Jan
        Message 3 of 6 , Oct 21, 2010
        • 0 Attachment

          On Oct 21, 2010, at 5:35 PM, Jecel Assumpcao Jr. wrote:

           

          Jan-Paul Bultmann wrote:

          > Hey,
          > I noticed that Self does not have a unit-testing Framework.

          True.

          > In Smalltalk test driven development is a fundamental part of the
          > system, at least as far as I know.

          It is now a major part of Smalltalk and other language frameworks. The
          rise of agile programming methods is one factor that has made unit
          testing more popular.

          > So were there just more important things to do or is this a design
          > choice?
          > Are unit-tests useless in the self world or is there a better thing
          > I'm just missing :)?

          It is important to remember that the Self project was killed way back in
          1995. David Ungar continued to improve things on his own and was finally
          able to release his changes in 2000. More improvements were done by
          Dave's team as part of the Kline project until that was killed in 2006.
          As far as I know, Russell Allen is behind most of the changes since
          then.

          A result of this history is that many things in Self are frozen as they
          were back in 1995. If you look at the built in web browser, for example,
          it doesn't even understand tables. I would say that the lack of a unit
          test framework is due to the same thing.

          In Self, a unit testing framework would probably be more elegant than in
          Smalltalk since it is so much easier to create unique objects.

          Yeah, I thought of that too.
          I'd be pretty easy to use mock objects simply by exchanging some slots.

          Greets Jan



          -- Jecel


        • Jecel Assumpcao Jr.
          ... True. ... It is now a major part of Smalltalk and other language frameworks. The rise of agile programming methods is one factor that has made unit testing
          Message 4 of 6 , Oct 21, 2010
          • 0 Attachment
            Jan-Paul Bultmann wrote:

            > Hey,
            > I noticed that Self does not have a unit-testing Framework.

            True.

            > In Smalltalk test driven development is a fundamental part of the
            > system, at least as far as I know.

            It is now a major part of Smalltalk and other language frameworks. The
            rise of agile programming methods is one factor that has made unit
            testing more popular.

            > So were there just more important things to do or is this a design
            > choice?
            > Are unit-tests useless in the self world or is there a better thing
            > I'm just missing :)?

            It is important to remember that the Self project was killed way back in
            1995. David Ungar continued to improve things on his own and was finally
            able to release his changes in 2000. More improvements were done by
            Dave's team as part of the Kline project until that was killed in 2006.
            As far as I know, Russell Allen is behind most of the changes since
            then.

            A result of this history is that many things in Self are frozen as they
            were back in 1995. If you look at the built in web browser, for example,
            it doesn't even understand tables. I would say that the lack of a unit
            test framework is due to the same thing.

            In Self, a unit testing framework would probably be more elegant than in
            Smalltalk since it is so much easier to create unique objects.

            -- Jecel
          • Russell Allen
            There are a small number of unit tests spread around the standard image, but no framework. I have looked at porting over sUnit or equivalent but haven t yet.
            Message 5 of 6 , Oct 21, 2010
            • 0 Attachment
              There are a small number of unit tests spread around the standard image, but no framework.

              I have looked at porting over sUnit or equivalent but haven't yet.  If anyone creates a decent unit testing framework I'd be happy to include it!  

              One issue is Self's preference for passing error handling blocks down the stack rather than having a error handling mechanism passing error objects up the call stack.

              Another issue is where the tests go. In most Smalltalks they seem to sit in a parallel class structure, semantically linked by the class name ie "OrderedCollectionTest" etc.  Is this the best way?  What is the equivalent in Self?  I must admit to not wanting to tie our objects to the formal lobby naming hierarchy more than necessary.  

              Russell

              On 22/10/2010, at 5:54 AM, Jan-Paul Bultmann <janpaulbultmann@...> wrote:

               


              On Oct 21, 2010, at 5:35 PM, Jecel Assumpcao Jr. wrote:

               

              Jan-Paul Bultmann wrote:

              > Hey,
              > I noticed that Self does not have a unit-testing Framework.

              True.

              > In Smalltalk test driven development is a fundamental part of the
              > system, at least as far as I know.

              It is now a major part of Smalltalk and other language frameworks. The
              rise of agile programming methods is one factor that has made unit
              testing more popular.

              > So were there just more important things to do or is this a design
              > choice?
              > Are unit-tests useless in the self world or is there a better thing
              > I'm just missing :)?

              It is important to remember that the Self project was killed way back in
              1995. David Ungar continued to improve things on his own and was finally
              able to release his changes in 2000. More improvements were done by
              Dave's team as part of the Kline project until that was killed in 2006.
              As far as I know, Russell Allen is behind most of the changes since
              then.

              A result of this history is that many things in Self are frozen as they
              were back in 1995. If you look at the built in web browser, for example,
              it doesn't even understand tables. I would say that the lack of a unit
              test framework is due to the same thing.

              In Self, a unit testing framework would probably be more elegant than in
              Smalltalk since it is so much easier to create unique objects.

              Yeah, I thought of that too.
              I'd be pretty easy to use mock objects simply by exchanging some slots.

              Greets Jan



              -- Jecel


            • Jan-Paul Bultmann
              Since I am new here I am gonna flood you guys with some questions :D Self is such a beautiful language and environment (not in a design sense ; ) ) and I think
              Message 6 of 6 , Oct 21, 2010
              • 0 Attachment
                Since I am new here I am gonna flood you guys with some questions :D Self is such a beautiful language and environment (not in a design sense ; ) ) and I think I finally found the holy grail^^

                •How is klein going? Still alive?
                •What do you think of TUIO (Multitouch Std Protocoll) integration, and converting the whole System to a mutlitouch environment? I think it would be the perfect match :D
                I will move heaven and earth at my university to get that as my undergraduate thesis :D


                On Oct 21, 2010, at 10:35 PM, Russell Allen wrote:

                 

                There are a small number of unit tests spread around the standard image, but no framework.

                I have looked at porting over sUnit or equivalent but haven't yet.  If anyone creates a decent unit testing framework I'd be happy to include it!  

                One issue is Self's preference for passing error handling blocks down the stack rather than having a error handling mechanism passing error objects up the call stack.

                Another issue is where the tests go. In most Smalltalks they seem to sit in a parallel class structure, semantically linked by the class name ie "OrderedCollectionTest" etc.  Is this the best way?  What is the equivalent in Self?  I must admit to not wanting to tie our objects to the formal lobby naming hierarchy more than necessary. 
                Sounds reasonable. Maybe a new testing application that allows you to integrate drivers, objects and mock objects. Im imagining the test driver on the left, the object under test in the middle connected with lines, and the mocks on the right also connected with lines, so that you can instantly see how its driven and how its hooked up :/...^^


                Cheers Jan

                Russell

              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.