1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
|
- Test description language (testscript) [feature]
Requirements
============
* Run multiple tests
* Multiple testscript files (to group related test)
* Specify exit status (optional, expect 0 by default).
* Run pre/post test actions (setups/teardowns, e.g., database schema creation).
* Test input (optional)
* Test stdout output (to compare to, optional)
* Test stderr output (to compare to, optional)
* Test description
* Create (and automatically clean up) input/output files
? Variable expansion, looked up on target in buildfile
* Ability to pass arguments from build files (how for multiple scripts?)
Could use $0, $1, $*.
* Ability to pass arguments from command line.
? if/else, loops (we will have ternary operator as part of eval context)
* Multi-line comments (to disable a chunk of test; #\)
* Ability to suppress output (/dev/null)
* Ability not to clean up output (if failed)
* This should be consistent/uniform with how we handle simple tests without
testscripts (i.e., perhaps they can be treated "as if" they had a one-line
testscript).
Questions
=========
* What if the testcript attached at the buildfile level? An executable? What
if the test is not for an executable. I guess we always have the directory
target.
We could reuse the test variable to specify (list of) scripts:
exe{hello}: test = test1 test2
Or maybe testscript should be a target (usually in src) itself?
* Do we want a notion of multi-command test (e.g., with pre/post commands)?
Maybe {}? Will need it not to clean up output files too early. Also var
scope.
* What if we need to define some global variables for the entire script?
* Ability to include testscripts (for grouping/organization purposes). Also
include common definitions?
* Ability to redefine $0 (e.g., to src_base to run scripts)?
* What extension to use for script files? Should it be conventional or
configurable/enforced?
.t, .test, .ts, .tst, .bt, <none>
Notes
=====
* If expected exist status is not 0, then probably makes sense to suppress
stderr output if there is no comparison.
Syntax
======
The goal is to be as concise as possible at least for the common cases.
$0 World # hello World, 0 exit expected
$0 "John Doe" # hello "John Doe"
$0 == 1 # hello, 1 exit expected
$0 != 0 # hello, non-0 exit expected
$0 World >>EOO
Hello, World!
EOO
$0 World >"Hello, World!"
$0 2>>EOE
Usage: $0 <name>
EOE
$0 --trace <<EOI >>EOO 2>>EOE # The data should appear in the order specified.
World
EOI
Hello, World!
EOO
13 characters written
EOE
~ Built-in cat command with auto-cleanup? To create files for tests, etc.
~ Built-in sed(-like) utility? Note that GCC 4.8 has broken <regex> support,
only usable from 4.9. Could be a problem.
~ We should probably allow assignment of variables and since we will also
lookup those defined in the buildfile, makes sense to use the same semantics
(and perhaps even the parser, like we do for command line). Also value
types.
So in a sense for each test we will have an "inner" variable scope where
we lookup first.
~ Could support assigning output of a program to a variable:
foo = `sed ...`
The semantics should probably be "as if you had the output literally",
without any of the extra shell splitting nonsense, just the standard
buildfile logic.
Probably also support piping.
~ Output file redirects should be relative to out_base. Input? Could actually
track created out files and use that if exists, and src otherwise. What if
the test create a file without a redirect? Will need to "register" it
somehow for auto-cleanup. Maybe &<file>? Also for directories &<dir>/.
Does this mean that any program argument starting with & is recognized to
be a file/directory for auto-cleanup?
~ Will there be a way to combine stderr and stdout, could be useful sometimes
(e.g., order of output relative to diagnostics). 2>& syntax?
~ Do we support command piping?
~ What if we actually do want the output to go to a file, e.g., for a second
command to act on it? Maybe keep shell syntax since familiar? Or reverse it
(> - inline, >> - multiline, >>> to file). Simplest thing is the shortest, I
like it. What about appending to file - >>>>? Maybe >&file?
~ $0 is target path (works out in case of a directory, but will be out).
~ #-comment (also for mid-line)
~ quoting & escaping (need to think and specify). Would be nice to avoid shell
madness. Perhaps only support escaping only inside quoted strings).
~ If we support variable expansion inside "here doc", what if we need to
specify literal '$'? Perhaps treat heredoc as a kind of string? Maybe only
do effective escaping? Otherwise will have to escape backslashes...
~ Will probably need to support both $foo and $(foo) syntax. Will need to
replicate var name lexing mode form build2. Perhaps use it to avoid
duplication?
~ line continuation with \
~ == !=
~ Specify named variables instead/in addition to arguments
...: test = test1 test2
...: test.test1.var1 = ...
~ Perhaps the default variable type should be strings, not names? Thought
we reverse most things pretty well.
~ CWD should probably be running tests in out_base (so if they create some
files).
~ Clean up is tricky: sometimes we may want to keep it, but then how to clean
it up later (the test might fail if there is junk present). Maybe create
temp directory in out_base and run there? Will also help with parallel runs.
~ We will need an ability to execute same command multiple times with some
argument variations. For simple cases the following idiom can be used:
cmd = a b c
$cmd d e f # Expands to: a b c d e f
v=`$cmd x y z`
The problem is that only the last arguments (of the last program in pipe) can
be varied.
What if we can support variable templates with the following syntax:
# Template variable definition. Same as a regular variable assignement but
# $n variables are not expanded and denotes template parameters.
#
cmd ~= a $1 b | c $2
# Instantiations. First n values that follows template variable expansion are
# template arguments.
#
$cmd d e f # Expands to: a d b | c e f
v=`$cmd x y`
Is this really common, this need to have a piped multi-command and to pass
arguments to more than one of them? Remember, the idea is that tests must
be as direct (literal) as possible. Any kind of indirection (or hiding
things in variables) would just make stuff harder to understand. So maybe
something like this should be just written as:
a d b | c e f
v=`a x b | c y f`
But would be nice to see a real use-case that needed this.
~ How to control script execution from the command line? What about the
followig approach.
For test operation build2 assumes arguments which follows a special marker
(-) to be intended for a test script target and get assigned to a special
variable ($@). Test script normally just pass them to the program being
tested. In the absense of the marker all unrecognized arguments are assigned
to $@. So effectivelly the marker is required only to disambiguate build2 own
arguments from a test target ones. Test script do not extract any information
from $@ (while can modify it as any other variable).
To ammend a test script execution the command line variables can be used.
Probably it make sense to require such a variable to be defined in a
buildfile to make sure it is initialized (with a default value). Example:
buildfile:
./: test = test1
./: test.test1.c = ""
./: test.test1.remote = false
./: test.test1.verbose = false
test1 script:
$@ = (verbose ? : "-q") + $@
cxx_options = (c != "" ? "config.cxx=$c" : )
Command line:
$ b test remote=true c=clang++ verbose=true - --verbose 4
To define variable for all target test script we could use a special script
name (*):
./: test = test1 test2
./: test.*.c = ""
It is also tempting to extract test script variable values from command line
options, so the above example could be changed in the following way:
buildfile:
./: test = test1
./: test.test1.c = ""
./: test.test1.remote = false
./: test.test1.verbose = 0
test1 script:
$@ = (verbose == 0 ? "-q" : ) + $@
cxx_options = (c != "" ? "config.cxx=$c" : )
Command line:
$ b test remote=true c=clang++ - --verbose 4
|