Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:47369
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain googlemail.com designates 72.14.220.152 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Status: bad
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=googlemail.com; s=gamma;
        h=cc:message-id:from:to:in-reply-to:content-type
         :content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject:date:references
         :x-mailer;
        b=CUaj4y/QprgsNOS3M0elpWJc+bOSWAivfjpn911rp5YQYQwP1KiWHQ7WUUK2wKklOv
         hnGGc+Fh1O4fc5Fhmm7DmKEfdRnwaQHu149qEx/9AicisZyzaAjIF5KshhJh0yrWvkLW
         WxFWYE6O+esNVaBuNogFzQg4lfPtO+FYYVjr0=
Cc: Hannes Magnusson <hannes.magnusson@gmail.com>,
 internals@lists.php.net
Message-ID: <EB8DB4F6-DB61-4446-A0CE-93225BB4AB5A@googlemail.com>
To: jani.taskinen@iki.fi
In-Reply-To: <4B9A2796.10002@iki.fi>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v936)
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 00:05:37 +0100
References: <4B9926E8.4080202@lerdorf.com> <4B995F83.1000605@prohost.org>	 <4B99639B.9030405@oracle.com> <4B996FC6.7040102@zend.com>	 <4B997381.1050300@oracle.com> <4B9A14FF.6000703@iki.fi> <7f3ed2c31003120229j51f4cad2w4b5be5fe753066c2@mail.gmail.com> <4B9A2796.10002@iki.fi>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Tests repository
From: foolistbar@googlemail.com (Geoffrey Sneddon)


On 12 Mar 2010, at 12:37, Jani Taskinen wrote:

> On 03/12/2010 12:29 PM, Hannes Magnusson wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 11:18, Jani Taskinen<jani.taskinen@iki.fi>   
>> wrote:
>>> Having tests in multiple branches is PITA. Hasn't anyone  
>>> considered that the
>>> best way would be to move all tests into their own repository
>>> (directory..whatever :) in SVN..? Considering they are supposed to  
>>> be used
>>> for testing against regressions and BC breaks, they should always be
>>> runnable using any PHP version?
>>
>> Thats actually a fairly good idea.
>>
>> Some tests however are not supposed to work in earlier releases, so  
>> we
>> need to either add a new
>> ==SKIP-VERSION==
>> 5.2, 5.1, 5.0
>
> Perhaps something like required min version is better.
>
> Any ideas who has been working on the improved test stuff? Or was  
> that just a dream?

I'd rather just check for whether a feature exists or not, rather than  
hard-coding version numbers in tests. For example, hat happens if the  
PHP 5.3/6 case repeats itself, with more and more being backported? Do  
we need to go through and change skip-version metadata on hundreds of  
tests? Could we not just check that, e.g., "get_called_class" exists?

With such feature testing (in skipif?) we could just do something  
along the lines of:

---FILE---
<?php
if (version_compare(PHP_VERSION, '5.3', '>=') &&  
function_exists('get_called_class'))
	echo 'PASS';
elseif (version_compare(PHP_VERSION, '5.3', '<') && ! 
function_exists('get_called_class'))
	echo 'PASS';
else
	echo 'FAIL';
?>
--EXPECTF--
PASS

Then, through the magic of logic, we would be guaranteed to have the  
right results for each version if all tests pass, and only one place  
to change when backporting/removing a feature.

-g