On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 14:17:51 -0700, Jameson Graef Rollins <jrollins@finestructure.net> wrote: > On Tue, 1 Nov 2011 20:49:11 +0100, Pieter Praet <pieter@praet.org> wrote: > > -test_expect_success 'emacs delivery of signed message' \ > > +test_expect_success GPG 'emacs delivery of signed message' \ > > Hi, Pieter and Thomas. Thanks for all the work on this, but I have one > issue. Is there a way we can do this without adding a new argument to > every test function? For some reason I really don't like that solution. > It seems too invasive. Can't we have something that works more like > test_subtest_known_broken, that modifies the test environment, rather > than add an argument to every call of every testing function? > > jamie. I've been thinking the very same thing. We could use `test_have_prereq' to get rid of the argument, e.g.: #+begin_src sh test_have_prereq EMACS && \ test_begin_subtest "blah" echo "doing stuff..." test_expect_equal_file OUTPUT EXPECTED #+end_src ...but still, everything between `test_begin_subtest' and `test_expect_*' would be executed, so to err on the safe side, we could wrap the full body of every test, e.g.: #+begin_src sh test_begin_subtest "blah" test_have_prereq EMACS && { ... echo "doing stuff..." ... } test_expect_equal_file OUTPUT EXPECTED #+end_src Or... (I've given this zero thought, so please take it with a bag of salt) we could run all tests from inside a "controller" which `eval's their contents line by line, and skips a test entirely whenever $? > 0. All of this is (still) excessively invasive in some way or another though... Suggestions? Peace -- Pieter