On Sun, 10 Dec 2006, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
On Sun, 3 Dec 2006, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
On Dec 2, 2006, at 5:24 PM, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
Well, compatibility would be a lot easier if we had automated tests like most programming languages have. (That's why I had started a project called PureUnity)
How about finishing it and adding it to the nightly builds?
Well, if I'm still alone for doing it, I might have a partial demo to show off at the next PdConvention. As it is right now, I have already enough work with DesireData, and after that I have to work on GridFlow a lot. The test suite needs not to be written by me. How about you making that test suite? What would it be like? When?
Ok, we will have a major shift of focus now. PureUnity becomes a priority, but also, the scope of that project gets expanded to cover our current autotest needs. PureUnity will have DesireData-specific features so that Pd patches can be used to test Tcl/Tk code.
What's going on is that naïve testing (code then try) that most are using in the pd community, is not scaling well at all, given the growing feature set of DesireData, and especially the combinatorics of it. We need to reshape our software development process. PureUnity started as thought experiment that I planned would turn out useful later when I'd finally work on non-GUI components, but now it needs to be useful now, and the most pressing need is not even about testing the behaviour of individual objects or of simple object combinations, but about the process of putting objects together through the GUI, which is something radically different but for which I have faith that there will be significant commonality with the original goals of PureUnity.
_ _ __ ___ _____ ________ _____________ _____________________ ... | Mathieu Bouchard - tél:+1.514.383.3801 - http://artengine.ca/matju | Freelance Digital Arts Engineer, Montréal QC Canada