Use C++ testing framework

Richard Kimberly Heck rikiheck at
Thu Jan 14 23:58:53 UTC 2021

On 1/14/21 6:24 PM, Yuriy Skalko wrote:
>> I hope that developers will respond to this and say "The ctests suck.
>> If they were simple unit tests then I would contribute to writing
>> them and I would run them before I commit!". I will (seriously) be
>> happy to see such messages.
>> In any case, my main point is that I don't recommend going forward
>> with the unit tests if just a few people are on board. That said, a
>> few people *could* be sufficient. I would have abandoned the ctests
>> long ago if Kornel were not also going through the same frustration
>> that others break the tests and we have to report them and adapt the
>> tests. It's really not fun. But it is useful, and other developers
>> are usually very responsive and helpful in fixing regressions found
>> by the ctests. Thus, if you ignore my warnings and decide you are
>> willing to suffer, I guess I would jump in with you whenever I get
>> more free time back (not for a while).
> Thanks for the support, Scott. If there will be no objections from
> other developers this can start after 2.4 release (or earlier, in
> feature branch?)

I'm hoping that people will focus their energies mostly on bug-fixing
for the 2.4.0 release. But I understand that that isn't as fun as doing
new things. Also, I usually think it's best to get agreement on the
framework before launching into a lot of work. But, in this case, I
think maybe many of us need to see what this might look like, so
starting to develop the framework in a feature branch (even if it
happened after 2.4.0) is the way to go. Expanding the tests in support/,
and integrating the existing ones into whatever framework you have in
mind, would be a good start, I think.


More information about the lyx-devel mailing list