Re: [ANN] Lua 5.2.0 (work2) now available

[liam mail <liam.list@...>]

2010/1/15 Luiz Henrique de Figueiredo <lhf@tecgraf.puc-rio.br>

> > The tests directory is probably misnamed. It should have been "examples"
> > or "samples". The code there was never meant to be a test suite.
>
> I've seen too many times that peope confuse it with a proper test suite. :-(

Here is a past thread on this, which still seems relevant:
       http://lua-users.org/lists/lua-l/2006-03/msg00631.html
       http://lua-users.org/lists/lua-l/2006-03/msg00641.html

OK I wonder where the confusion comes from? The things that look like tests, in a test directory, called tests and advised to run as tests are not tests yet none working examples. [/sarcasm]


It is interesting to see the posts from four years ago, but it does beggar the question why they were not renamed back then as there seemed to be no opposition to the proposal.


"Yes, but on their own code. We can test on those toy programs ourselves.


By releasing work versions we give a chance for people to try to build
the "upcoming" version of Lua an try their programs on it to see if or
how they break."

I do not want to sound like I am attacking the library, yet this just seems backward. The "toy" programs should confirm correct compliation and setting in the environment. After all it is asking a lot for the maintainers to test the library on every platform with can run it, unless you have a Google type virtualisation project up your sleeve. With tests users could report what failed and how after running them.

I would like to add my support to the proposal to rename the "tests" to examples and if possible distribute the library with a test suite.
Liam