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

Any interest in alternative output schemes? #2

Closed
kalafut opened this Issue May 19, 2015 · 4 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
2 participants
@kalafut
Contributor

kalafut commented May 19, 2015

I like the leanness of this library a lot. But I'm using it in a terminal application that takes over the screen, so I forked your repo to hack in a way to buffer the test result outputs so I could see them. I don't like being on a fork for this, especially when I'm changing other libraries and want to use 'is'.

I assume you're trying to keep this really small, but any interest in supporting some optional message buffering or logging? The change is pretty minor. Right now my fork is rough, just getting something to work for my project. If you wanted this additional feature, I'd be happy to clean things up (probably to just take a Writer as an output) and submit a pull request. If not, that's fine too.

@tylerb

This comment has been minimized.

Owner

tylerb commented May 19, 2015

Glad you like it!

It's not a bad idea, but I am wondering if you thought of redirecting the stdout/stderr to a file? Is that not possible in your scenario?

On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 10:43 PM, Jim Kalafut notifications@github.com
wrote:

I like the leanness of this library a lot. But I'm using it in a terminal application that takes over the screen, so I forked your repo to hack in a way to buffer the test result outputs so I could see them. I don't like being on a fork for this, especially when I'm changing other libraries and want to use 'is'.

I assume you're trying to keep this really small, but any interest in supporting some optional message buffering or logging? The change is pretty minor. Right now my fork is rough, just getting something to work for my project. If you wanted this additional feature, I'd be happy to clean things up and submit a pull request. If not, that's fine too.

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#2

@kalafut

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

kalafut commented May 19, 2015

That's actually where I started. But termbox completely seizes the console, plus I have to contend with Windows use as well. I didn't find a good way to leverage redirection.

BTW, I just replaced my fork with simple Writer-based implementation that is cleaner than the string I was using if you happened to look about 10 minutes ago...

@tylerb

This comment has been minimized.

Owner

tylerb commented May 19, 2015

I haven't been at my computer so I haven't had a chance to look. I'll get back to you when I am able.

On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 11:46 PM, Jim Kalafut notifications@github.com
wrote:

That's actually where I started. But termbox completely seizes the console, plus I have to contend with Windows use as well. I didn't find a good way to leverage redirection.

BTW, I just replaced my fork with simple Writer-based implementation that is cleaner than the string I was using if you happened to look about 10 minutes ago...

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#2 (comment)

@tylerb

This comment has been minimized.

Owner

tylerb commented May 19, 2015

Your fork looks good to me. Straightforward and clean. Very nice.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment