[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: KUnitTest
From:       Adriaan de Groot <groot () kde ! org>
Date:       2005-10-21 20:47:48
Message-ID: 200510212247.48772.groot () kde ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

On Friday 21 October 2005 18:13, David Faure wrote:
> On Friday 21 October 2005 17:35, Thomas Kadauke wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I looked at the documentation of KUnitTest and saw that it's really
> > messed up, yet pretty easy to fix. But with QtTestLib (?) being used all
> > over the place, I wonder if KUnitTest is deprecated for 3.5 branch. If
> > not, I'd fix the documentation.
>
> KUnitTest is all we have in 3.x, but it's replaced by QtTestLib in 4.0.
> So in the long run kunittest is indeed deprecated/dead,
> but if you care about people developing code for KDE-3.5, then KUnitTest
> is the unit test lib to use. There is no QtTestLib for Qt-3.

I'd be pretty hesitant to write dox for this; it's not like KUnitTest is 
widely used. There are surely more low-hanging fruit to be had (KAccel* comes 
to mind, it's missing tons of things) as well as -- more important -- 
overview writing. Forward-porting dox is becoming harder as well,now that 
char * name is gone everywhere and patches can't be applied. Frankly, I'm 
starting to think that apidox volunteers -- as opposed to class / library 
authors who are supposed to also maintain their apidox -- should be working 
on KDE 4 dox, in spite of the volatility that's out there.

-- 
These are your friends - Adem
    GPG: FEA2 A3FE Adriaan de Groot
 
>> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]