Re: [jamboost] Test system

From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-04-04 01:18:58

David Abrahams wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Vladimir Prus" <ghost_at_[hidden]>
>
> > Striken. Now the docs have no introduction phrase at all.
>
> Thanks! Are the updated docs still at:
>
> http://chronos.cs.msu.su/~ghost/projects/boost-build/test.zip?
>
> I guess not - when I look there I see the same docs.

Well... quoting the message you reply to:
>> BTW, the document is now in CVS under tools/build/test/test_system.html
:-)

> > > > copy_tree -- sets the working tree from existing directory
> > >
> > > The name copy_tree and the description seem contradictory. The
> > > description makes it sound like the working directory is simply
> > > changed to be the same as the directory specified (no copying).
> >
> > The new wording and method name is:
> > set_tree -- sets the content of the working directory to be equal to
> > the content of the specified directory. 
> I'm sorry, it seems worse that way to me. Let me suggest something. Tell
> me if this doesn't reflect your intended meaning:
>
> copy_tree - copies an existing directory tree and sets the working
> directory to the root of the copy.

Nay, this is not what the method does. It actually does
rm -rf . && cp -r dir .
as you already spelled it, not
mkdir /tmp/another_tmp_dir && cp dir /tmp/another_tmp_dir && cd /tmp/another_tmp_dir

> > > > Method copy_tree(self, tree_location)
> > > So this does, essentially, "rm -rf * ; cp -r tree_location ." ?
> > >
> > > If so, you should say, "ERASES the contents of the current working
> > > directory and copies the contents of 'tree_location' there", just to
> > > be clear how dangerous it is.
> >
> > Isn't "replaces" quite explicit already?
>
> Explicit, but quiet. If you do say "replaces", please say "replaces the
> contents of..."

Changes as you suggest.

> > > > Example:
> > > >
> > > > mul("/home/ghost", [".bashrc", ".bash_profile"])
> > > > will return
> > > > ["/home/ghost/.bashrc", "/home/ghost/.bash_profile"]
> > >
> > > IMO it would be better to provide class BoostBuildTest.List, such
>
> that:
> > > List(r"this is\ a test") * List(r'.foo .py')
> > > == List(r"this.foo this.py is\ a.foo is\ a.py test.foo test.py")
> > >
> > > List(r'this is\ a test')[1] == 'is a'
> >
> > Why would you like it? When specifying name to {except, ignore}*
>
> methods, it
>
> > make no difference. Or do you have wider applications for such class?
>
> 1. I think it would be cleaner.
> 2. Fewer quotes
> 3. I think Scons will want it eventually
> 4. I am looking into the future at making Scons and Jam more similar.

I understand you and your argumentation is OK for me. I'll implement this 
someday, hopefully soon.

Please also comment on the issues that you've omitted due to lack of the 
updated version of the docs.

- Volodya