Re: [cdt-dev] M7

[Doug Schaefer <dschaefer@xxxxxxx>]

BTW, for tests, our team here at QNX is using WindowTester. I need to get
more experience with it but it may be a better solution than SWTbot.

On 12-05-09 9:46 PM, "Marc Khouzam" <marc.khouzam@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>
>Great timing!
>
>So, on the Debug front, yesterday I opened
>Bug 378834 - Add Debug JUnit tests to Hudson
>(https://bugs.eclipse.org/378834)
>I was focusing on Linux, but I would also like to have those run on
>Windows, as it would give us much greater
>confidence on our situation for Windows.
>
>The step after that is to get some UI tests.  I believe other parts of
>CDT are running some automated UI tests,
>and I would appreciate knowing what tools they used for that.  I've had
>discussions about how to best implement
>UI tests, and I'm now thinking that SWTBot may not be the best solution;
>it may be to sensitive to the actual layout
>of the UI.  I was told we can trigger the code we want to test without
>actually 'faking' mouse movements and such.
>I still have to look into it, but that may be a better way to go.  In the
>end, we don't want to test SWT, so as long
>as our code is exercised, that should be enough.
>
>Other things we could look into are such things as using Sonar, which
>would automatically run things like
>FindBugs, Code Coverage, and other metrics, which would give us a quick
>status on our current code at every build.
>
>If someone can help me get Bug 378834 resolved, we'd be making a good
>step forward for Debug.
>
>Thanks
>
>Marc
>
>
>________________________________________
>From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
>Of Cortell John-RAT042 [RAT042@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>Sent: May 9, 2012 7:22 PM
>To: CDT General developers list.
>Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] M7
>
>Big +1
>
>Utopian situation:
>
>
>·         Every feature/fix has an automated test case
>
>·         Test suite execution becomes part of the build process, on
>Windows and at least one popular flavor of Linux
>
>·         Any failures are reported on the list and considered a P1
>issue; should be addressed ASAP.
>
>·         Nothing is delivered without near 100% success
>
>Any software house that is strongly committed to quality embraces these
>objectives. I don¹t see that we try to meet any of these. Part of the
>problem is lack of infrastructure (test environments and lack of swtbot
>integration). Without the infrastructure, good intentions fall short.
>E.g., I remember when working on dsf-gdb, many man hours were spent
>writing tests. Great, but the tests required a developer to take the
>initiative to manually run them on his particular machine. Not so great.
>Also, many features can¹t be tested because junit alone is inadequate;
>the features require using something like swtbot.
>
>John
>
>But this does point out how poor our test coverage is and that we need to
>get stricter on test failures, and possibly our code review process to
>make sure quality doesn't suffer like this in the future.
>_______________________________________________
>cdt-dev mailing list
>cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev