[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: test directory
- From: Kein-Hong Man <mkh@...>
- Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 02:34:29 +0800
Luiz Henrique de Figueiredo wrote:
We're thinking about removing the test directory from the tarball.
The 'test' directory were quite useful as sample programs to play
with when I started using Lua. Maybe it should just be called
'samples'. It would take up space in the tarball, but it would not
at all bloat one's implementation of Lua in an application.
One nice thing about Perl is that one can really learn a lot
looking at all the Perl modules that come standard with every Perl
installation. In a small way, a 'samples' directory in the Lua
tarball can help new users. One does not have to hunt around to
find the samples, because it will be in the tarball.
Mike Pall has suggested offline that the community would be better
off with a 'known good' Lua source code repository. Initially it
could include all the examples from PIL, a few programs from the test
directory, and his benchmark tests. He thinks the Wiki is 'suboptimal'
for this. So perhaps it's better to have a luaforge project?
But what will it actually test? What kind of code coverage will it
have? Will we exercise all aspects of a typical Lua
implementation? I would rather have the existing test suite that
Roberto mentioned worked into something that is very easy for the
Lua integrator to use in order to verify that most things work.
Better still, put it into the tarball and add a 'make test'.
Right now, most of us programmers are in 'crafting' mode. It would
be great if Lua can take one step forward and help get us into
'engineering' mode. We need lots of tests and stuff we can verify.
No guessing or finger-crossing or voodoo. Small languages are
popping up like flies -- a comprehensive test suite that is easily
used by an adopter of Lua will give Lua a distinct advantage over
all those competitors, and it is good engineering.
Kein-Hong Man (esq.)
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia