Unit Testing 1.0

[Zachary Carter]

Is there a branch that already implements the Unit Testing 1.0 spec[1]? If there isn't, I can work on it (I'm about to convert a largish amount of QUnit tests.)

[1] http://wiki.commonjs.org/wiki/Unit_Testing/1.0

--
Zach Carter
http://zach.carter.name

[Kris Kowal]

On Sat, Nov 14, 2009 at 7:57 PM, Zachary Carter <zack....@gmail.com> wrote:
> Is there a branch that already implements the Unit Testing 1.0 spec[1]? If
> there isn't, I can work on it (I'm about to convert a largish amount of
> QUnit tests.)
>
> [1] http://wiki.commonjs.org/wiki/Unit_Testing/1.0

Oh. I started one, but it's only partial. I pushed it for you…

http://github.com/kriskowal/narwhal/tree/assert

It has stubs for lib/assert.js and lib/test.js.

I also have a fork of qunit with some stuff for running QUnit on
Narwhal's current test runner framework; that might save you some
time, although implementing Unit_Testing/1.0 would help us a lot. It
has a qunit command that runs qunit tests as scripts. It requires
changes in my Narwhal refactor branch and it's by no-means complete
either.

http://github.com/kriskowal/qunit

Kris Kowal

[Zachary Carter]

On Sat, Nov 14, 2009 at 11:04 PM, Kris Kowal <cowber...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Sat, Nov 14, 2009 at 7:57 PM, Zachary Carter <zack....@gmail.com> wrote:
> Is there a branch that already implements the Unit Testing 1.0 spec[1]? If
> there isn't, I can work on it (I'm about to convert a largish amount of
> QUnit tests.)
>
> [1] http://wiki.commonjs.org/wiki/Unit_Testing/1.0

Oh.  I started one, but it's only partial.  I pushed it for you…

http://github.com/kriskowal/narwhal/tree/assert

It has stubs for lib/assert.js and lib/test.js.

Great!  It looks like the equivalence assertions are the only pieces really missing. I'll take a look at this.

[Zachary Carter]

I've posted a github issue with the commit: http://github.com/tlrobinson/narwhal/issues/#issue/76

I noticed you had some stubs for specifying the the operator of the assertion in the AssertionError. The output of the test runner doesn't currently use it, but I left them in case you wanted to tweak it.

[Kris Kowal]

On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 5:51 PM, Zachary Carter <zack....@gmail.com> wrote:
> I've posted a github issue with the commit:
> http://github.com/tlrobinson/narwhal/issues/#issue/76
>
> I noticed you had some stubs for specifying the the operator of the
> assertion in the AssertionError. The output of the test runner doesn't
> currently use it, but I left them in case you wanted to tweak it.

Thanks, I've merged it and verified it works. Most excellent. Now we
can share compliance tests :-)

Kris Kowal