GNU bug report logs - #66782
29.1; ERT tests reports test redefined depending on loading sequence

Previous Next

Full log

Message #50 received at 66782 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Xiyue Deng <manphiz <at> gmail.com>
To: Mattias Engdegård <mattias.engdegard <at> gmail.com>
Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>, 66782 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#66782: 29.1; ERT tests report test redefined depending on
 loading sequence
Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2023 10:17:01 -0700

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Xiyue Deng <manphiz <at> gmail.com> writes:

> Mattias Engdegård <mattias.engdegard <at> gmail.com> writes:
>
>> 29 okt. 2023 kl. 22.53 skrev Xiyue Deng <manphiz <at> gmail.com>:
>>
>>> As far as I know, there is no practical use for a test case to depend on
>>> another test case in any language I worked with as a test case provides
>>> no reusable component.  On the other hand, there are alternatives that
>>> makes more sense to do what they (e.g. lsp-mode) are doing.  Again, IMHO
>>> I think it makes sense for ERT not to support it or to even forbid it.
>>> Doing this also avoids such misleading error message I was reporting,
>>> which got triggered depending on the loading sequence which may make
>>> test suites flaky (as the loading sequence is not deterministic).
>>
>> I don't think ERT can forbid anyone from loading in the same .el file multiple times because it's none of its business. Or did you have something else in mind?
>>
>
> It's not that loading the same .el multiple times that caused this
> error, but loading a module with `ert-deftest' and both .el modules are
> passed to batch ert processing which is common practice.  But see below.
>
>> All in all, I'm not sure there is anything that we can do in Emacs right now that would help, but if you have any concrete suggestions, do tell.
>>
>
> I understand if upstream don't want to complicate `require' logic too
> much.  However I wonder whether it's OK to add warning if a required
> module has `ert-deftest' in it, so that it can help people identify that
> a `Test "foo" redefined' error is due to requiring other module instead
> of an actual duplicated test name.  How does this sound?

As I didn't get an answer I assume this was a no-go.  So instead I'd
like to propose a slight change to the error message to mention that it
may also be caused by an ert test being loaded multiple times.  Patch is
attached, please let me know whether this works.

-- 
Xiyue Deng

[0001-Revise-test-redefined-error-message.patch (text/x-diff, attachment)]

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.