Re: [GSoC Proposal] automake - Interfacing with a test protocol like TAP or subunit

[Ralf Wildenhues]

Hi Robert,

thanks for the feedback.  I have a couple of questions:

* Robert Collins wrote on Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 05:10:16AM CET:
> TAP is an extremely simple protocol, and the extensions to it to
> support things like not needing to maintain the count of tests,
> additional debug data and so on are pretty rudimentary. subunit, which
> I've mentioned before was written after TAP, to solve similar problems
> and address the issues in TAP itself.

Are TAP and subunit compatible on their common subset?  If not, why not?

> Unlike TAP subunit supports attachments (binary and text) to tests,

Handling of binary data may end up being quite tricky within a
restricted Posix environment with only a few tools available.
What if a consumer cannot handle them?  Is there possibility
for graceful fallback?

> test naming, tagging, timestamping (permitting robust timing data even
> in parallelised or distributed testing).
> 
> Integrating with TAP is basically uninteresting to anyone working in a
> high level language: Python, Ruby,Java, C++ etc.

Well, Perl is a high-level language too, I'd say.  ;-)

Thanks,
Ralf