Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add source dependency of test suite implementation to main function #5069

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Sep 6, 2018

Conversation

TeBoring
Copy link
Contributor

This change adds a source dependency of the test suite implementaion
class in the main function. For generality reason, the main function is
moved to the file of the test suite implemetation. New test suite
implementation will need to implement the main function.
In order to make it easy for test suite implementation to implement the
main function, this change also refactor out the common code out of the
main function.

@xfxyjwf
Copy link
Contributor

xfxyjwf commented Aug 23, 2018

Can you do just enough in this PR to make the tests work again and do any follow-up refactoring in a separate PR? Ideally this PR should only contain changes to Makefile.am.

@TeBoring
Copy link
Contributor Author

Done in #5073

@xfxyjwf xfxyjwf assigned haberman and unassigned xfxyjwf Aug 24, 2018
@xfxyjwf
Copy link
Contributor

xfxyjwf commented Aug 24, 2018

Bo, can you update the description of this PR accordingly?

@TeBoring TeBoring changed the title Fix conformance running nothing issue Add source dependency of test suite implementation to main function Aug 24, 2018
@TeBoring
Copy link
Contributor Author

Done

This change adds a source dependency of the test suite implementaion
class in the main function. For generality reason, the main function is
moved to the file of the test suite implemetation.  New test suite
implementation will need to implement the main function.
In order to make it easy for test suite implementation to implement the
main function, this change also refactor out the common code out of the
main function.
Copy link
Member

@haberman haberman left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think this is better than the dynamic registration approach.

// suite->RunSuite(&runner, &output);
// }
// MyConformanceTestSuite suite;
// MyConformanceTestRunner::Run(argc, argv, &sutie);
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

check spelling of "suite"

@TeBoring TeBoring merged commit 5aeee3d into protocolbuffers:master Sep 6, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants