On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 6:40 PM, Tim Landscheidt<tim(a)tim-landscheidt.de> wrote:
Chad <innocentkiller(a)gmail.com> wrote:
[...]
What we need is something similar to parser tests, where it's
absurdly easy to pop new tests in with little to no coding
required at all. [...]
Is it really so much more difficult to write
| TestAddArticle ("Main Page", "blah blah");
than
| !! article
| Main Page
| !! text
| blah blah
| !! endarticle
or
| TestParser ("External links: trail", "Linktrails should not work for
external links: [
http://example.com link]s", "<p>Linktrails should not
work for external links: <a href=\"http://example.com\" class=\"external
text\" rel=\"nofollow\">link</a>s\n</p>");
than
| !! test
| External links: trail
| !! input
| Linktrails should not work for external links: [
http://example.com link]s
| !! result
| <p>Linktrails should not work for external links: <a
href="http://example.com" class="external text"
rel="nofollow">link</a>s
| </p>
| !! end
I think the motivation for using standard techniques is to
lower the bar for newcomers to the code and not have them
to master another ("fairly self-explanatory") syntax.
Tim
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
I don't disagree here. I don't really care what the particular format
is. My main point (on which I think we agree) was that it needs to
be standardized, easy to learn and use, and very flexible to a variety
of tests we could potentially want.
-Chad