Test Support Tools
==================
:Author: Hermann Voßeler
:Date: 2012

.copied from TiddlyWiki
NOTE: This page holds content copied from the old "main" TiddlyWiki +
      It needs to be reworked, formatted and generally brought into line

********************************************
.Lumiera relies on *test-driven development*
This page discusses the overall organisation
of test code, and the tools used for
running test cases
********************************************

Tests are the only form of documentation, known to provides some resilience against
becoming outdated. Tests help to focus on the usage, instead of engaging in spurious
implementation details. Developers are highly encouraged to write the tests _before_
the actual implementation, or at least alongside and interleaved with expanding the
feature set of the actual code.
There may be exceptions to this rule. Not every single bit needs to be covered by tests.
Some features are highly cross-cutting and exceptionally difficult to cover with tests.
And sometimes, just an abstract specification is a better choice.

As a rule of thumb, consider to write test code which is easy to read and understand,
_like a narration_ to show off the relevant properties of the test subject.

Test Structure
--------------
- a *test case* is an executable, expected to run without failure, and optionally producing
  some verifiable output
- simple test cases may be written as stand-alone application, while the more tightly
  integrated test cases can be written as classes within the Lumiera application framework.
- test cases should use the +CHECK+ macro of NoBug to verify test results, since the normal
  assertions may be de-configured for optimised release builds.
- our test runner script 'test.sh' provides mechanisms to check for expected output

Several levels of aggregation are available. At the lowest level, a test typically runs
several functions within the same test fixture. This allows to create a ``narrative''
in the code: first do this, than do that, and now that, and now this should happen...
Generally speaking, it is up to the individual test to take care or isolate himself
from any _dependencies_. Test code and application code uses the same mechanisms
for accessing other components within the application. Up to now (2014), there
was no need for any kind of _dependency injection_, nor did we face any
difficulties with tainted state.

Test classes are organised into a tree closely mirroring the main application source
code tree. Large sections of this test tree are linked together into *test libraries*.
Some of these are linked against a specific (sub)scope of the application, like e.g.
only against the support library, the application framework or the backend. Since we
use _strict dependencies_, this linking step will spot code not being placed at the
correct scope within the whole system. As a final step, the build system creates a
*test runner* application (`target/test-suite`), which links dynamically against _all_
the test libraries and thus against all application dependencies.
Individual test classes integrate into this framework by placing a simple declaration
(actually using the `LAUNCHER` macro), which typically also defines some tags and
classification alongside.
This way, using command line parameters for invocation of the test runners, it is possible
to run some category or especially tagged test classes, or to invoke just a single test class
in isolation (using the ID, which is also the class name).

The next level of aggregation is provided by the top level test collection definitions
located in the 'test/' subdirectory. For running these collections as automatic tests within
the build process, we use Cehteh's `test.sh` shell script.


Tools and conventions
---------------------
Test code and application code has to be kept separate; the application may be built without any
tests, since test code has a tendency to bloat the executables, especially in debug mode. As an
exception, generic _test support code_ may be included in the library, and it is common for core
components to offer dedicated _test support_ and _diagnostic features_ as part of the main application.

Conventions for the Buildsystem
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
to help with automating the build and test execution, test code should adhere to the following conventions:

- test class names should end with the suffix +_test+
- their tree and namespace location should correspond to the structure of the main application
- test classes should be placed into a sub namespace +...::test+
- specific definitions for a single test case may rely on global variables,
  but these should live within an anonymous namespace
- all test executables should be named according to the pattern +test-*+
- all test source code is within the 'tests' subtree
- immediately within the 'tests/' directory are the test collection definitions +*.tests+,
  ordered by number prefixes
- below are the directories with test cases, to be grouped into the aforementioned test-executables.
- we distinguish two ways to write and link tests: _standalone_ and _suite_

  * subtrees of test classes (C++) are linked into one shared library per subtree. In the final linking step,
    these are linked together into a single testrunner, which is also linked against the application core.
    The resulting executable 'test-suite' is able to invoke any of the test classes in
    isolation, or a group / category of tests. +
  * simple plain-C tests (names starting with 'test-*') are grouped into several directories thematically, 
    and linked according to the application layer. Each of those simple tests needs to be self contained
    and provide a main method.

Internal testsuite runner
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The class `test::Suite` (as used by 'tests/testrunner.cpp') helps building an executable which will run _all registered
test case objects,_ or some group of such test cases. Each test case implements a simple interface and thus provides
a `run (args)` function, moreover, it registers itself immediately alongside with his definition; this works by the
usual trick of defining a static class object and calling some registration function from the constructor of this static var.
See the following

.hello-world-test example
[source,C]
----------------------------------------------------------------
#include "lib/test/run.hpp"
#include <iostream>

using std::cout;
using std::endl;

namespace test   {
    
  class HelloWorld_test
    : public Test
    {
      virtual void
      run (Arg) 
        {
          greeting();
        } 

      void
      greeting() 
        { 
          cout << "goodbye cruel world..." <<endl; 
        }
    };

  /** Register this test class to be invoked in some test groups (suites) */
  LAUNCHER (HelloWorld_test, "unit function common");    
}
----------------------------------------------------------------

.Notes:
* type Arg is compatible to `std::vector<string> &`
* this vector may be `arg.size()==0`, which means no commandline args available.
* these args may contain further arguments passed from system commandline (or the testsuite definition).
* the test can/should produce output that can be checked with 'test.sh'
* the macro `LAUNCHER` expands to +
  `Launch<HelloWorld_test> run_HelloWorld_test("HelloWorld_test","unit function common");`
* note the second parameter to the macro (or the `Laucher`-ctor) is a space-delimited list of group names
* thus any test can declare itself as belonging to some groups, and we can create a `test::Suite` for each group if we want.

invoking a testrunner executable
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The class `test::TestOption` predefines a boost-commandlineparser to support the following options:

[width="90%",cols="<.<,^4"]
|====  
2+<| `./test-suite --group <groupID> [testID [arguments...]]`
|`--help` | options summary
|`-g <groupID>` | run all tests from this group as suite. If missing, ALL tests will be included
|`[testID]` | (optional) one single testcase. If missing, all testcases of the group will be invoked
|`--describe`| print all registered tests to stdout in a format suited for use with test.sh
|====
Further commandline arguments are deliverd to a single testcase only if you specify a `testID`.
Otherwise, all commandline arguments remaining after options parsing will be discarded and all tests of the suite 
ill be run with an commandline vector of `size()==0`



The Test Script `test.sh`
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To drive the various tests, we use the script 'tests/test.sh'. +
All tests are run under valgrind control by default (if available), unless `VALGRINDFLAGS=DISABLE` is defined
(Valgrind is sometimes prohibitively slow). The buildsystem will build and run the testcode when executing
the target `scons check`. The target `scons testcode` will just build but not execute any tests.

Options for running the Test Script
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
- Valgrind can be disabled with `VALGRINDFLAGS=DISABLE`
- one may define `TESTMODE` containing any one of the following strings:
 
  * `FAST` only run tests which failed recently
  * `FIRSTFAIL` abort the tests at the first failure

- the variable `TESTSUITES` may contain a list of string which are used to select which tests are run. +
  If not given, all available tests are run.


.Examples:
. running a very fast check while hacking::

  (cd target; TESTSUITES=41 VALGRINDFLAGS=DISABLE TESTMODE=FAST+FIRSTFAIL ../tests/test.sh)
  
. invoking the buildsystem, rebuilding if necessary, then invoking just the proc-layer test collections::  

  scons VALGRIND=false TESTSUITES=4 check

. Running the testsuite with everything enabled is just::

  scons check


Writing test collection definitions
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The definitions for test collections usable with `test.sh` are written in files named '##name.tests'
in the 'tests/' directory dir, where ## is a number defining the order of the various test files.
Of course, ``name'' should be a descriptive name about what is going to be tested. Each test collection
may invoke _only a single binary_ -- yet it may define numerous test cases, each invoking this binary
while supplementing different arguments. Combined with the ability of our test runner executables to
invoke individual test classes, this allows for fine grained test case specifications.

In a `*.tests` file the following things should be defined:

- `TESTING <description> <binary>` sets the program binary to be tested to the command line `<binary>`,
  while `<description>` should be a string which is displayed as header before running following tests
- `TEST <description> [optargs] <<END`  invokes the previously set binary, optionally with additional arguments.
  `<description>` is displayed when running this individual test case.
  A detailed test spec must follow this command and be terminated with `END` on a single line.
- these detailed test specs can contain following statements:

  * `in: <line>` sends `<line>` to stdin of the test program
  * `out: <regexp>` matches the STDOUT of the test program with the reguar expression
  * `out-lit: <line>` expects <line> to appear literally in the stdout of the test program
  * `err: <regexp>`
  * `err-lit: <line>` similar for STDERR
  * `return: <status>` expect <status> as exit status of the program

- if no `out:` or `err:` is given, stdout and stderr are not considered as part of the test.
- if no `return:` is given, then 0 is expected.
- a detailed log of the test collection invocation is saved in ,testlog


Numbering of test collection definitions
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
We establish some numbering conventions to ensure running simpler tests prior to more complex ones.
Likewise, more advanced integration features should be tested after the application basics.

The currently employed numbering scheme is as follows
[width="75%",cols="^,<7"]
|====
|00 |The test system itself
|01 |Infrastructure, package consistency
|10 |Basic support library functionality
|20 |Higher level support library services
|30 |Backend Unit tests
|40 |Proc Layer Unit tests
|50 |User interface Unit tests (Gui, Scripting)
|60 |Component integration tests
|70 |Functionality tests on the complete application
|80 |Reported bugs which can be expressed in a test case
|90 |Optional tests, example code
|====

