You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
In my experience within the regulated industry space, many software teams are looking for more granular documentation about tests. Broadly, this could also provide a good avenue for adding other test qualities.
At my place of work we've explored some early POCs for adding roxygen2 headers to testthat::test_that blocks and wanted to float the idea upstream.
#' @meta author dgkf#' @meta feature cli
test_that("cli printing works as expected") {
...
})
This is largely inspired by a pattern for using pytest marks for attaching test metadata:
Although metadata is certainly the focus of this proposal, adopting roxygen headers for tests could have other benefits, such as allowing for better-documented tests with separation of succinct title and longer-form description for complicated test scenarios and possibly using it as a more consistent location to tag tests as "skip on" or other flags.
For the sake of discussion, a reckless re-imagining of the test api could look something like:
#' cli printing works as expected#'#' Test that a sensible cli is displayed regardless of terminal capabilities, #' testing fully ansi-capable ttys, dynamic last-line capable tty renderers#' like RStudio and a simplified ascii-only output.#'#' @meta author dgkf#' @meta feature cli#'#' @skip-on CRAN, CI
test({
...
})
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Thanks for confirming! This was my suspicion, but I wanted to float it here first as to not split the ecosystem unnecessarily.
We've got a little POC that implements a new reporter for this - effectively a JunitReporter that parses the roxygen headers and inserts them into the junit output. I'll see if we can get it open-sourced now knowing that this is something you feel is best served by a supporting package.
In my experience within the regulated industry space, many software teams are looking for more granular documentation about tests. Broadly, this could also provide a good avenue for adding other test qualities.
At my place of work we've explored some early POCs for adding roxygen2 headers to
testthat::test_that
blocks and wanted to float the idea upstream.This is largely inspired by a pattern for using
pytest
marks for attaching test metadata:Although metadata is certainly the focus of this proposal, adopting roxygen headers for tests could have other benefits, such as allowing for better-documented tests with separation of succinct title and longer-form description for complicated test scenarios and possibly using it as a more consistent location to tag tests as "skip on" or other flags.
For the sake of discussion, a reckless re-imagining of the test api could look something like:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: