-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.1k
CATCH needs a more searchable name #406
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Comments
That is not a bad idea. I usually need to enter more keywords into my +1 on this. I like the sound of CppCatch or Catch++ On Wednesday, April 22, 2015, VZ notifications@github.com wrote:
|
+1 — how about Catchy? |
Strange, I always get this software as first result with: catch c++ test |
@paolobolzoni That's sort of the point though. You need to enter additional keywords to find this framework. Try typing just 'cppunit' instead. You find that framework right away. No additional keywords. The same will not occur if you just type 'catch'. |
I guess you feel the problem, but I really don't... Typing spaces or letters kinda looks the same to me, but if you dislike typing spaces so much, I get this software as first result also with catchtest. |
Yes, getting the GitHub repository as the first result in Google is not that hard. I agree. However, what if I want to find additional tutorials or examples people have posted on their blogs? Or comparisons of the framework against CppUnit, Google Test, Boost, etc? Compare the results of 'catch review' vs. 'cppunit review', or 'catch tutorial' vs. 'cppunit tutorial'. Again, I understand that typing one or two additional keywords fixes the issue. But doing anything that makes it easier for the user to find information is a win. |
I see the point now, perhaps making the official name catchtest (or something...) can indeed help. |
+1 for catchtest |
+1 for anything other than "catch" :-) In case anyone still doesn't get the problem: |
Maybe it's better to find a name without special characters in in. I also like the suggestion @claymation made of above, which is Catchy. |
This discussion is very interesting. There are a lot of questions which are hard to find because catch is very generic. I like Catch++. and.. what about a tag in stack overflow? |
Nice tip. There is: catch-unit-test. |
@philsquared Perhaps it'sa good idea to mention the StackOverflow catch-unit-test tag where also the dedicated Google Groups forum is mentioned, e.g. under More of the Readme, and maybe also in the Google group itself. |
+1 to adding that to the readme. I didn't even know there was a Google Groups forum! |
sorry guys - just getting to my issues backlog... I think it's time to take this seriously. I've been having a think about a new name. It's been hard. I really like Catch, and it has a certain amount of momentum behind it. I don't take changing it lightly. But I'm aware of the problems. Thanks to all those in this thread - as well as other places - who care enough about Catch to be raising the issue and making suggestions. I've considered:
Also, coming up with a name that is entirely unlike Catch may make it harder for people to join the two up - although I'm not sure that concern holds up to inspection. Anyway I have stumbled on one that I do like. It's an acronym - ironically even more naturally so than Catch - has a relatable identity (great for icons and other imagery) - and has those properties I liked (friendly, fun etc). So what is it? Here it is... Are you ready for it? . Catfish That's: C++ Automated Test Framework In a Single Header. Thoughts? Regards, [)o |
There's got to be an ascii "catfish" somewhere.. |
🐱 🐟 Stupid emoji-puns aside: I love it! It's distinctive, a bit similiar to catch, and (no pun intended) catchy! |
I like it! It doesn't seem to conflict with anything (there seems to be something with this name for Javascript but nothing related to unit testing), it is fun and you could even find some relationship with the library purpose if you really stretched it (it bottom feeds on your bugs?). Sorry to have burdened you with all this by originally opening this ticket (IME naming is not just one two but the hardest problem in computer science...), but I think it was worth it, Catfish is an excellent find, thanks! |
Interesting analysis. A completely new name loses you all "brand" you currently have, so may not be so useful. "catfish" has lots of logo potential, but is still an existing word: how do I catfish on google gets 12.6 million hits that any new Catch articles have to compete with. how do I "catchtest" gets 2000 google hits - it fact it has such as small share of the webosphere at the moment that I need to add quotes to stop Google thinking I made a typo. how do I "catch++" has 187 hits (and the 3rd one is this thread ;-) |
I played with various searches as well and for me the important thing is that there are almost no matches for "catfish c++ unit tests" currently. The only possible conflict I saw was this program that exists in some Linux repositories but I a package would be called |
+1 for Catfish! |
+1 for Catfish too! |
.... this code seems somewhat fishy ;) |
(sorry wrong button) |
@vadz has raised an interesting issue. I can recall that every time I web-searched for CATCH, I was wondering how to get best results with such a common name! :-) I give 👍 for renaming CATCH. 👎 for catfish, because it's not unique enough - there's already 30 million pages indexed by the big G :) CATCH -> Ketchy |
@mloskot Sounds like ketchup... |
Had I not known what Catch is, were I to hear about it in a C++ context, I'd search for "catch c++" or "catch library", both of which are on top. |
I've let this languish again - but since work is well underway on Catch 2.0 - which is going to be a big change - it seems like the right time for a name change too, if we're going to do it. After a little time to look back I don't particularly like the name Catfish now (my previous proposal) - certainly not enough to lose the original "branding". So my new proposal is simply: Catch2 The 2 here is part of the name - similar to how the X in OS X, while pronounced "ten", and associated with the 10.x versioning, was part of the name. So it would start as Catch2 v2.0. It has the advantage of being very close to the original - in a way that search engines should be able to allow for - while still prioritising exact matches. Thoughts? |
Does _any_one actually pronounce it ten? I've only ever heard and used it as Ough-Ess Ecks |
If you hang out in Mac or iOS developer communities you'll hear most people pronounce it "ten" - also watch any Apple keynote that talks about it. |
Also, I think the proper "incorrect" pronunciation is, "Oh, Essex" |
I'd prefer to stay cancer-free, thanks |
Catch2 is cool. @philsquared can we read somewhere about planned changes introduced by v2 (esp. the ones to public API / that are backwards-incompatible)? OS X being an "OS 10" sounds pretty arrogant. |
On 5 July 2016 at 12:23, Phil Nash notifications@github.com wrote:
Then, Catch11 :) |
@rr still working on it. I'm currently exploring the possibilities that the rebasing on C++11 allows. I'm going to write a blog post soon.
In terms of breaking changes - despite the degree of internal rework I want to keep that to a minimum. The main areas will be around the use of strings - especially string conversions - which will use the new custom string type - as well as the new conversions framework. Reporters may be impacted too - but I may be able to provide an adapter for those (as I did with reporter interfaces changes when going to 1.0). It's possible the Session class may change too. There's more but that's OTTOMH for now. Blog post to come. |
Actually there might be something in that! |
Phil y u do dis |
@nabijaczleweli several reasons, some of which I already hinted out. I'll go into it more in the blog post. |
Looking at it this way the current Catch could be or have been named Catch98. |
@philsquared Just to have it asked: could a minimal string_span (string_view) be of help? "In case you missed it: string_view also in C++17", Herb Sutter, Trip report: Summer ISO C++ standards meeting (Oulu). |
FWIW I don't think this is going to solve the problems which motivated me to open this issue. Whether it's Catch2 or Catch11 or Catch22, people will still refer to it as "Catch" for short and I don't think searching for it is going to work very well. I still like the original CATFISH suggestion, but if you really want something even catchier, what about CATCHFISH. I'm sure someone will come up with backronym expansion for this if needed. |
I am sure the strapline "softly softly catchee buggy" indicates Catchee might work. BTW next generation Catch will have to compete with RapidCheck for traction, property-based testing will become more important that example-based testing. |
@martinmoene actually it's a pair of |
@vadz bear in mind there's no content (other than this page) for Catch2 in this context yet. I do hear you about people still calling it just "catch" (one of the concerns I voiced before) but there's a fine line to be trod here - too different and we lose the association with "Catch Classic". Too similar and people will drop back to calling it just "Catch". Ironically the situation has become a classic Catch-22! I'm still opening to further suggestions. Another possibility I've been toying with is "Recatch". |
@russel yeah, PBT is certainly one of the big things I have in mind for Catch2. |
@philsquared Thanks for the explanation. (The word minimal meant to imply do-it-yourself w/o waiting for C++17;) |
I think keeping the same prefix would be enough to avoid breaking the association with the current version, so I think anything starting with "Catch" (CATCHEM? CATCHUP? CATCHTOO? CATCHY?) would work. From this point of view, "Recatch" is not ideal, although it does seem appealing otherwise. |
@vadz that was my thinking with Catch2. Actually a quick search now (I use DuckDuckGo which shouldn't skew the results based on previous search history etc) confirms that catch+suffix returns far more relevant results than prefix+catch. |
... actually the search terms were " |
Why pull short with C++11? I've found that C++11 compliant compilers also support C++14 (and most of C++1z.) |
The very latest versions support large parts of C++14, yes - but even then is spotty - and only the latest versions (e.g. Visual Studio 2015, but not 2013) - whereas fairly good C++11 coverage has been around for a few years now - so even several older versions support it (although I don't think VS 2010 will keep up - not sure what the lower bound or gcc and clang will be yet). I would love to use C++14 (17 even more so!), but most of what I would use it for here is minor convenience - compared to the night & day difference between 03 and 11. In the code I've written so far I'm not sure a single line is valid C++03 ;-) |
My 2cents (For what it's worth) When you proposed catch2, I immediately thought of Catch 22, which may or may not be bad. Anyways, I'm glad that you are reopening this issue because I have had problems searching for catch solutions in the past. I'm fine with catch2 or catch11, but people will definitely keep calling it catch. |
My two cents Re the original issue: philsquared is so prolific, that using "philsquared" in place of "catch" in any search query is bound to get you exactly want. Now perhaps that doesn't scale to the future since it isn't part of the brand, but steering searchers to include your handle might give you a little flexibility as you rebrand. If the biggest break is compiler dependence, using catch11, catch17, is ok. People will definitely keep calling it catch though. Embrace success! |
I am going to close this in favor of #769, where we can also discuss the name of the upcoming rework. |
This is not the first time I run into this and I always just shrugged it off before, but after completely failing to find anything about the issue I was interested in (whether anybody has already done something to help with migrating the existing tests using CppUnit to CATCH) I have to say that this is a real problem: it's just impossible to find anything about CATCH using web search.
It needs to use some unique name or at least not a word so prevalent when speaking about unit testing in C++ (because I'm not interested in finding about how to catch exceptions in CppUnit, damn it).
It can be anything you like, I don't know if you prefer obvious but dull names (CppCatch, CatchUTF, ...), some other abbreviation (C++ Automated Tests Now Are Possible) or stupid puns (Notry, Dogch, ...) or hopefully something better I can't find, but it needs to be something you could enter into your search engine and actually find something related to CATCH.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: