Code review comment for lp:~rogpeppe/gocheck/add-list-flag
Revision history for this message
| Gustavo Niemeyer (niemeyer) wrote | # |
© 2004
Canonical Ltd.
•
Terms of use
•
Data privacy
•
Contact Launchpad Support
•
Blog
•
Careers
•
System status
•
0e1f616
(Get the code!)
https:/
File gocheck.go (left):
https:/
gocheck.go:554: filterRegexp.
On 2012/02/28 14:37:20, rog wrote:
> On 2012/02/28 14:17:27, niemeyer wrote:
> > We can't change the behavior of .f before the next announced
release.
> FWIW the new behaviour is exactly the old behaviour if the user
doesn't use ^ or
> $ in their regexp. none of the tests needed to change, which is a
useful
> indicator.
> i'll revert nonetheless.
The new behavior is exactly the old behavior except when it's not.
https:/
File run.go (right):
https:/
run.go:28: "Regular expression selecting what to run (use -gocheck.list
to see what this matches against)")
On 2012/02/28 14:37:20, rog wrote:
> On 2012/02/28 14:17:27, niemeyer wrote:
> > Please revert this. -gocheck.list is documented below already.
> AFAIK the text that the regexp matches is not documented anywhere (for
instance
> i didn't know that you could filter on a suite name until i read the
source
> code). if this isn't a reasonable place to document the behaviour,
perhaps you
> could suggest another.
Documenting the -gocheck.list option twice isn't a good way to do what
you want. You can say something like:
"Regular expression selecting which test and/or suite to run"
Also, when you see a test name in a verbose run or on a failure, that
format works, so it's not like it's entirely magical.
https:/
File run_test.go (right):
https:/
run_test.go:296: "*gocheck_
On 2012/02/28 14:37:20, rog wrote:
> On 2012/02/28 14:17:27, niemeyer wrote:
> > What is this "*" doing there?
> the method is on a pointer type. i've found this info useful in the
past.
> perhaps it shouldn't be indicated though.
Yeah, not relevant here.
https:/