On Sun, 2 Jan 2011, Amr Shahin wrote:

>> check doesn't seem to be written to grok C89 compilers, have you checked
>> (no pun intended) if it does?
>
> i contacted check-devel. will let you know when i get a reply. I wonder
> however if this is important, the unit tests will be used by contributors
> not client-developers, i guess all of contributors will be using a modern OS
> and compiler.

First, not all contributors will work with C99 compilers.

Then, even non-contributors should as far as possible have the chance to run
the tests on their builds for their platform.

> it's not only about macros. to have a full unit testing framework we'll
> need to implement test suit handlers, test case handlers, output formatter
> etc ...

I don't understand. What are those and why do we need them?

> this sounds pretty much like re-writing check.

See my previous response. What exactly are you missing in my first take?

> And quoting from Vincent's reply below, the quality won't be guaranteed

What? Are you suggesting that we can't write test code that is as good as the
Check team does?

> (check is being used and it has a dedicated team to support).

... but you seem to forget that Check is not integrated into our build and
test suite and you have not even tried to do that yet so I've saved you a lot
of work this way...

> The effor made to expand our current test can be used to actually write the
> tests, few KBs sound like a small price :)

Didn't I already do most of that work (and it was very easy and quickly done)
and you can now start writing the tests?

-- 
  / daniel.haxx.se
-------------------------------------------------------------------
List admin: http://cool.haxx.se/list/listinfo/curl-library
Etiquette:  http://curl.haxx.se/mail/etiquette.html