Skip to content
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

Command-line interface for test runner #3

Closed
jibsen opened this issue Jan 11, 2016 · 3 comments
Closed

Command-line interface for test runner #3

jibsen opened this issue Jan 11, 2016 · 3 comments

Comments

@jibsen
Copy link
Collaborator

jibsen commented Jan 11, 2016

A command-line interface for selecting tests and setting options would be nice.

@nemequ
Copy link
Owner

nemequ commented Jan 12, 2016

I had been thinking that it would be necessary to allow people to parse their own options, too, but I think with #7 we could have something completely generic which would still be powerful enough to accommodate pretty much everyone.

@jibsen
Copy link
Collaborator Author

jibsen commented Jan 12, 2016

You could parse options until -- (normal end of arguments), or --args (bit like gdb), and then leave the rest to the user code? I realize there are a lot of options here and what works will depend on use case.

I just know the first thing I did after compiling was example --help 😊.

@nemequ
Copy link
Owner

nemequ commented Jan 12, 2016

I hadn't really considered that, though TBH I'm not really a fan. It's good if you are going to exec something else, but IMHO it's a bit weird for something like this. On the plus side, it would allow you to handle nonoptions fairly elegantly, which is something I hadn't figured out.

If µnit supported parameterized tests, though, the use case for customizing the CLI becomes much smaller. The generic interface could handle something like ./run-tests --params "codec=zlib,level=3" /buffer/compress /single-byte/compress /single-byte/decompress.

nemequ added a commit that referenced this issue Jan 13, 2016
Sorry this isn't finer-grained; it made more sense to do this all
at once.

#7
#6
#3
@nemequ nemequ closed this as completed Jan 13, 2016
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants