Talk:List of unit testing frameworks

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of Computing WikiProject, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to computers and computing. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received an rating on the importance scale.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the List of unit testing frameworks article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

Contents 1 xUnit 2 Layout: Tables 3 Expansion 4 Regarding language dialects 5 Specify Visual Basic 6 (VB6) 6 Emacs Lisp 7 QTestLib

[edit] xUnit

What is the difference between this article and the xUnit article? -- nolandda

Not all of these frameworks are xUnit. --Chris Pickett 05:59, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Layout: Tables

I converted (then IP) the bullet-list page to a big number of small tables. The point was that then you have a TOC and can click on your language. Could we discuss the pros and cons of One-big-table versus Many-small-tables? --User77764 13:04, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Another reason for many small tables is that I want to introduce columns to the C++ table which don't make sense anywhere else. --User77764 13:11, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

And to be able to do this, I will revert to the many tables version. This is no final decision of course. --User77764 13:31, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Yet another idea: There are many languages with only one framework listed. Maybe combine them all into a single table while those languages with multiple entries get tables of their own? --User77764 16:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

That will make it annoying if and when new frameworks crop up, it should be all the same style I think. So many smaller tables is fine, if somewhat more cumbersome to maintain when adding a new category to each table. I was thinking one big table for the columns that can be common between languages, and smaller tables for the columns particular to a language, but then you have to maintain the list of frameworks in two places. So many smaller tables then, but add the xUnit column to all of them. I wish table-editing was wysiwyg, would make life easier. --Chris Pickett 17:54, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

OK, so we go for one table per language... maybe add all columns that are explained at the top to all tables? --User77764 18:08, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Sure... and it seems better if the common columns in each table go before the language-specific ones, with the exception of Remarks. --Chris Pickett 18:42, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Ack. --User77764 20:31, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Expansion

The list needs information. White boxes mean: We do not know. Anybody with sufficient knowledge please help out. Also, more columns should be added where appropriate. --User77764 14:58, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

In the PHP category, Code Igniter is a "Web Application Framework" so even if it contains a Unit test suite, it seems to be in a wrong place. 193.49.124.107 15:25, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Add QtUnit? Based on CppUnit. -- pne (talk) 09:49, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding language dialects

The language list surely is too long. Recently an entry for Symbian was added. Now this is clearly NO language, is it? Afaik, they use C++ in some flavor. Anyways, they don't deserve an own entry. Where to place such candidates? --User77764 17:49, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

I wasn't sure about that one either. You could merge it with C++, but is it really a C++ framework? What other ones did you want to merge? Chris Pickett 20:19, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, Transact-SQL and SQL? I don't know, most of the languages are unknown to me... (but I know more than one of them ;-) ) --User77764 18:28, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

I think we should just leave it. If you can find an example where compilers for either one will happily accept the other, then sure, merge to the same language. Chris Pickett 11:18, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, I still think the list (of languages!) is too long. But then, the "article" lacks in more important areas, for sure. --User77764 00:28, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Specify Visual Basic 6 (VB6)

I assume that the "Visual Basic" heading refers to Visual Basic Ver. 6, or at least I think it should. Visual Basic Ver. 6, a.k.a. "VB6", is of course quite distinct from VB .NET; the latter which I expect should be included under the ".NET programming languages" heading. So my suggestions: (1) change "Visual Basic" heading to "Visual Basic Ver. 6 (VB6)", and (2) remove csUnit entry from the VB6 group. csUnit already appears under the .NET programming languages, which it seems is correct -- from what I can tell, csUnit only supports .NET and does not support VB6. --Nmarler 16:42, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Emacs Lisp

The link for the ELisp unit testing package times out - is this link broken? Autarch 20:27, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

The link was indeed broken, as the server said the file didn't exist today. I added a link to the appropriate page as well as adding a link to another Elisp unit testing package. Autarch 16:24, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] QTestLib

Qt (toolkit) includes QTestLib. It should be on the list, but I'm not sure about the properties. --Ropez (talk) 12:50, 21 February 2008 (UTC)