[zeromq-dev] Testing framework

[Michael Compton]

Hi,

It could be possible to leverage the reporting and assertation
mechanism provided by existing unit test frameworks without actually
carrying out unit testing per say, or indeed writing the scripts in
said languages.

I developed an automated testing framework for a state-full HTTP
client/server application using a XML based DSL and a Python
unit test framework. I tried as much as possible to keep the DSL
declarative. These DSL scripts where interpreted and testing methods
injected into the Python test harnesses.

I'm not a huge fan of XML, indeed my prototype of the above was
S-Expression based, but the advantage is that XML support is pretty
much ubiquitous across all language environments. This could open the
possibility of any test scripts being used by any of the language
bindings as well; with the correct interpreter of course.

Of course such a DSL should be limited to do not much more than test
various network topologies and loads, which I think John
mentioned. Feature creep would be the death of it.

Michael


On Mon, 23 Jan 2012 12:56:05 +0000
Ian Barber <ian.barber at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 12:26 PM, Staffan Gimåker
> <staffan at spotify.com>wrote:
> 
> > Hi,
> >
> > Are there any plans to migrate libzmq to use a more fully-featured
> > testing framework (e.g. googletest)? The current automake test
> > system is a bit of a pain to work with since it's missing stuff
> > like a nice way to group related tests, a standardized way to do
> > fixtures, sensible messages from failed assertions, etc.
> >
> > Aside from an added (compile-time) dependency, are there any
> > reasons why the automake way is preferable?
> >
> > /S
> >
> 
> It's proved tricky to unit test, though there have been some attempts
> - if you check the list archive you'll find a few discussions,
> Steve-o's is probably the best summary of issues:
> http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.network.zeromq.devel/11587
> 
> Ian