[webkit-dev] Another WPT bite

Ryosuke Niwa rniwa at webkit.org
Mon May 8 23:15:33 PDT 2017

On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 11:01 PM, Brady Eidson <beidson at apple.com> wrote:
>> On May 8, 2017, at 10:44 PM, Ryosuke Niwa <rniwa at webkit.org> wrote:
>> On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 10:17 PM, Brady Eidson <beidson at apple.com> wrote:
>>> But now talking about testharness.js directly, I object on the grounds of "a
>>> file:// regression test is dirt easy to hack on and work with, whereas
>>> anything that requires me to have an httpd running is a PITA"
>> I think whether we use file:// or http:// is orthogonal point to using
>> testharness.js.  Many of the tests Chris and I have written using
>> testharness.js are checked into regular LayoutTests/ directories, and
>> they work just fine.
> Yes, I misunderstood this in Youenn's original message. Good to know!
>>> I just object to making it the "recommended way" of writing tests.
>> Would you equally object to making js-test.js / js-test-pre.js the
>> recommended way of writing tests?
> Yes.
>> If not, why?
> N/A
>> What we're suggesting is to give preferential treatments to
>> testharness.js over js-test.js / js-test-pre.js when you were already
>> planning to write a test with the latter two scripts.
> "It's okay to write your test however you'd like. If you were considering using js-test, maybe you should consider using testharness instead."
> Is that's what's being proposed?

The thing I specifically asked Youenn to ask is, whether we should
place a test inside LayoutTests/wpt like LayoutTests/http/tests when
we want to write a test using testharness.js which requires some sort
of network code.

Since people have had some opinions about directory structures in the past.

- R. Niwa

More information about the webkit-dev mailing list