[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: 2.62 AT_SETUP limitations

From: Joel E. Denny
Subject: Re: 2.62 AT_SETUP limitations
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 14:49:18 -0400 (EDT)

On Wed, 23 Apr 2008, Eric Blake wrote:

> Eric Blake <ebb9 <at> byu.net> writes:

> > I'll
> > probably check in something that uses -=<{( and )}>=- as the quote strings
> > across both macros.

So now the user must make sure to balance this new quote?  Or use @&t@ or 
something to break it up?  I'm afraid I'm never going to remember this.

That opening quote looks like an operator, -=, followed by the start of 
some special grouping construct, <{, followed by an opening parenthesis.  
I'd hate to be the poor developer of an experimental language containing 
such a grouping construct and then try to write a test case with:

  AT_SETUP([[Scanner Test: a-=<{(1+b)*5}>]])

Or maybe just a regexp engine test with a character class containing 
operators accidentally in the above order:

  AT_SETUP([[Regexp Test: [-=<{()}>!+]]])

I find it rarely pays to play the guessing game of "surely the user will 
never do *this*".  Moreover, I'm betting that the user will never guess 
that this bizarre string is actually special to autotest.  At the very 
least, can this new limitation be mentioned in the manual?  Or did I miss 


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]