Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2007, zmoelnig@iem.at wrote:
in practice i found it often simpler to write tests that only output a result when they know that they have passed: you need to create far less logic, which might minimize the chance to write buggy tests (which i found is inevitable) likewise, it is often simple to have a shortcut to tell the framework that the test is known to have failed (most of these shortcuts could be avoided by splitting the test into several sub-tests; in practice i found that i prefer to write less tests) apart from that, a mechanism to quit a test from outside after some timeout might be a good idea.
But this is not really what we were talking about. We were thinking about the WAIT state. I sort of assumed that there were both PASS and FAIL results, and this is why I said tri-state, but we were talking about how to represent WAIT in Pd.
yes, this is what i was talking about (and was a bit unclear): a test can only have 2 results (PASS and FAIL), but it can return more states (WAIT,...) in order to communicate to the framework that it needs special handling (e.g. more time)
i shouldn't have confused these 2 things.
fmg.asdr IOhannes