Fwd: [Windmill-dev] Controller naming

Mikeal Rogers mikeal at osafoundation.org
Thu Oct 11 10:51:27 PDT 2007 

Forgot to reply all.

-Mikeal

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Mikeal Rogers <mikeal at osafoundation.org>
> Date: October 11, 2007 10:47:42 AM PDT
> To: Matthew Eernisse <mde at osafoundation.org>
> Subject: Re: [Windmill-dev] Controller naming
>
> Fine, then I do want the IDE to omit all of the assert functions in  
> assertRegistry ( hash of jsUnit asserts ) when i call  
> getControllerMethods as they aren't actually part of the public  
> windmill controller.
>
> -Mikeal
>
> On Oct 11, 2007, at 9:51 AM, Matthew Eernisse wrote:
>
>> Mikeal,
>>
>> The reason we went with the redundant naming convention of  
>> "asserts.assertX" is because you ended up with a bunch of asserts  
>> using JavaScript reserved keywords as object property names.
>>
>> This is not just a bad idea from code cleanliness perspective, but  
>> causes fatal syntax errors in IE.
>>
>> Rather than having an inconsistent naming convention for asserts,  
>> we went with the redundant convention. I think in the long run  
>> this is way less confusing for people, as ultimately all the  
>> assserts are available for anyone to use irrespective of whether  
>> they originated as XUnix-compatible ones, or Windmill-native ones.
>>
>> Hope that makes sense.
>>
>>
>> Matthew
>>
>>
>> Mikeal Rogers wrote:
>>> Rather than try to explain what i would like the jum to do to  
>>> stay compatible and go back and forth about how much work it is I  
>>> just put together a patch.
>>> I tested it and after modifying the cosmo tests they all seem to  
>>> run fine.
>>> The only thing I couldn't test was the jum integration, i don't  
>>> have any tests to run through that lying around. But since i  
>>> basically just ripped off mde's code to assign all the functions  
>>> in a hash to an object I don't see why it wouldn't work.
>>> This is mostly Adam's code I'm messing with so he'll have to look  
>>> it over. But we have to end this discussion in order to release  
>>> 0.2 whether we take the patch and go in this direction or not.
>>> -Mikeal
>>> On Oct 11, 2007, at 12:35 AM, Adam Christian wrote:
>>>> Wait for mde to reply, I can't remember what the reasons were so  
>>>> there isn't really any point in me arguing. I know we had two  
>>>> options and we went with the current one for a reason.
>>>>
>>>> The forNotTitle has now been renamed and made a system only  
>>>> function resulting from its specific use case for the the page  
>>>> load, a more generic one will be added at a later date.
>>>>
>>>> On Oct 11, 2007, at 12:30 AM, Mikeal Rogers wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Whoops, didn't hit reply all.
>>>>>
>>>>> -Mikeal
>>>>>
>>>>> On Oct 11, 2007, at 12:29 AM, Mikeal Rogers wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Oct 10, 2007, at 11:37 PM, Adam Christian wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Mikeal, the whole asserts thing is there and redundant due to  
>>>>>>> a naming convention mde needed for developing the jsTests, we  
>>>>>>> had a long debate about it and this really was the best  
>>>>>>> solution.. however at the moment I can't remember the  
>>>>>>> details, mde?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, the solution was to do things like asserts.text, and mde  
>>>>>> was going to point jum.assertsBlah stuff at the proper  
>>>>>> windmill asserts.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We never agreed to bend the windmill controller naming  
>>>>>> convention to look like xUnit.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The waits.forNotTitle is useful because it allows you to  
>>>>>>> provide a HTML title, and to wait until it changes to  
>>>>>>> something else.. it's good for moving to a new page and we  
>>>>>>> use it in the loading code to wait to set a listener until  
>>>>>>> the testWindow title is no longer "Windmill Testing Framework"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ok, that totally makes sense, I was just really confused by  
>>>>>> the name. Now that I look at it, it's not even the name, is  
>>>>>> that when I read it he "Not" part stands out so much it  
>>>>>> confuses me. But whatever, it totally makes sense after  
>>>>>> explaining it. Maybe I'll update the WindmillBook to be a bit  
>>>>>> more descriptive.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Adam
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Oct 10, 2007, at 10:09 PM, Mikeal Rogers wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I was looking through the controller documentation and  
>>>>>>>> noticed some really nasty looking names.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I know it's a pain in the ass to change these, but we've  
>>>>>>>> gotta do this before we release 0.2 if we're going to do it.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I've already committed to not making any public API changes  
>>>>>>>> until 0.3, so this will have to go in tomorrow 0.2 before  
>>>>>>>> people invest in them any more.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://windmill.osafoundation.org/trac/wiki/BookChapter-4- 
>>>>>>>> WritingTests#AvailableMethods
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> waits.forNotTitle -- maybe this one is fine, i just don't  
>>>>>>>> understand it
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The entire assert namespace is redundant
>>>>>>>> asserts.assertText -> asserts.text
>>>>>>>> asserts.assertNode -> asserts.node
>>>>>>>> asserts.assertValue -> asserts.value
>>>>>>>> asserts.assertSelected -> asserts.selected
>>>>>>>> asserts.assertChecked -> asserts.checked
>>>>>>>> asserts.assertProperty -> asserts.property
>>>>>>>> asserts.assertImageLoaded -> asserts.imageLoaded
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What does everyone else think?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -Mikeal
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Windmill-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>> Windmill-dev at osafoundation.org
>>>>>>>> http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/windmill-dev
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Windmill-dev mailing list
>>>>> Windmill-dev at osafoundation.org
>>>>> http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/windmill-dev
>>>>
>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- 
>>> ----
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Windmill-dev mailing list
>>> Windmill-dev at osafoundation.org
>>> http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/windmill-dev
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Windmill-dev mailing list
>> Windmill-dev at osafoundation.org
>> http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/windmill-dev
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.osafoundation.org/pipermail/windmill-dev/attachments/20071011/195e21b6/attachment-0001.htm

More information about the Windmill-dev mailing list