Consistent naming scheme for unit tests?

[Aleix Pol]

On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 4:10 PM, Milian Wolff <mail at milianw.de> wrote:

> On Wednesday 09 July 2014 15:50:12 Kevin Funk wrote:
> > Hey,
> >
> > While working on kdevplatform/kdevelop in the past this one annoyed me
> quite
> > a bit:
> >
> > There's lots of different naming styles for file, executable and class
> names
> > for all the unit tests. This makes it hard to identify them when
> searching
> > for classes via Quick Open or when looking up test binaries in the build
> > folder.
> >
> > I'm proposing the following naming scheme (something I've already started
> > doing in kdev-clang):
> > - test_foo.cpp (file name)
> > - test_foo (target name)
> > - TestFoo (class name)
> >
> > To be applied to all existing unit tests (potentially as a junior job)
> and
> > for code written in the future.
> >
> > Advantages:
> > - Easy to look up via Quick Open because of the "Test" prefix
> > - Easy to determine if a given class/file/target is a test, again
> because of
> > the prefix
> > - Consistent!!11
>
> sounds good, +1
>
> bye
>

Maybe we can follow  how it's usually done in KF5?
- file name: classnametest.cpp
- target name: classnametest
- class name:ClassNameTest
- test name: subproject-classnametest

+1 for consistency anyway.

Aleix
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kdevelop-devel/attachments/20140709/c2117aa5/attachment.html>