[swift-corelibs-dev] URLSession test fest!

[Tony Parker]

> On Mar 9, 2017, at 9:52 PM, Pushkar N Kulkarni <pushkar.nk at in.ibm.com> wrote:
> 
> Peter: I agree. A stable testing infrastructure is absolutely necessary.  
> 
> Tony: I am curious about where the sources for these tests (that use the external httpbin.org) will be placed? Will it makes sense to have them in TestFoundation and have a guard to exclude them during normal test execution?

Sure, or we could add a standalone tool like I mentioned at the top of this thread.

Either way, we should make it as easy as possible to enable the tests when you’re iterating on this code so you can verify the absence of regressions.

- Tony

> 
> Pushkar N Kulkarni,
> IBM Runtimes
> 
> Simplicity is prerequisite for reliability - Edsger W. Dijkstra
> 
> 
> 
> -----Peter Tomaselli <vast.grapes at gmail.com <mailto:vast.grapes at gmail.com>> wrote: -----
> To: Tony Parker <anthony.parker at apple.com <mailto:anthony.parker at apple.com>>
> From: Peter Tomaselli <vast.grapes at gmail.com <mailto:vast.grapes at gmail.com>>
> Date: 03/10/2017 04:47AM
> Cc: Pushkar N Kulkarni <pushkar.nk at in.ibm.com <mailto:pushkar.nk at in.ibm.com>>, swift-corelibs-dev <swift-corelibs-dev at swift.org <mailto:swift-corelibs-dev at swift.org>>
> Subject: Re: [swift-corelibs-dev] URLSession test fest!
> 
> Just one outside data point on this: as someone who's been wanting to contribute to the test fest, I agree that being able to test against httpbin.org <http://httpbin.org/> (or some other pre-existing server — as opposed to the loopback server) would make it much easier to make useful contributions.
> 
> Not that the loopback server is bad, but I trashed several attempts at a contribution due to lack of confidence about my changes. Specifically, with both "ends" of the test apparatus in flux (for example, having to add "features" to the loopback server just so that features of URLSession could be tested), I found it very hard to know if either end was correct. 
> 
> So, just two cents from a lurker here, but this sounds like a great idea to me. Cheers,
> 
> Peter
> 
> On Mar 9, 2017, at 4:38 PM, Tony Parker via swift-corelibs-dev <swift-corelibs-dev at swift.org <mailto:swift-corelibs-dev at swift.org>> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Pushkar,
>> 
>> Another option is to continue to use httpbin.org <http://httpbin.org/>, but make the tests that use that network service not part of the normal unit tests but runnable on demand by us as we develop. That means we don’t have to reimplement the whole thing but we at least have some tools at our disposal to help debug and diagnose issues. As we make fixes we can improve our local unit test server’s infrastructure to prevent regressions.
>> 
>> - Tony
>> 
>>> On Mar 9, 2017, at 7:02 AM, Pushkar N Kulkarni <pushkar.nk at in.ibm.com <mailto:pushkar.nk at in.ibm.com>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi Tony, 
>>> 
>>> PRs 911 and 913 reminded me of this conversation you started. 
>>> 
>>> The current unit testing infrastructure for URLSession may prove insufficient for future contributions. I've been looking at these tests <https://github.com/mike-ferenduros/swift-corelibs-foundation/blob/more-urlsession-tests/TestFoundation/TestNSURLSession.swift> written by Mike Ferenduros and they appear quite exhaustive! The only issue is that they connect to an external HTTP test service - http://httpbin.org. <http://httpbin.org./>  
>>> 
>>> A quick look at httpbin.org <http://httpbin.org/> tells me it has sufficient functionality to aid in URLSession unit testing. Do you think it would make sense to emulate this functionality within TestFoundation?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Pushkar N Kulkarni,
>>> IBM Runtimes
>>> 
>>> Simplicity is prerequisite for reliability - Edsger W. Dijkstra
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -----swift-corelibs-dev-bounces at swift.org <mailto:-----swift-corelibs-dev-bounces at swift.org> wrote: -----
>>> To: swift-corelibs-dev <swift-corelibs-dev at swift.org <mailto:swift-corelibs-dev at swift.org>>
>>> From: Tony Parker via swift-corelibs-dev 
>>> Sent by: swift-corelibs-dev-bounces at swift.org <mailto:swift-corelibs-dev-bounces at swift.org>
>>> Date: 01/25/2017 01:13AM
>>> Subject: [swift-corelibs-dev] URLSession test fest!
>>> 
>>> Hi everyone,
>>> 
>>> As we’re wrapping up Swift 3.1, I think it’d be a great opportunity to have a quality focus area on one of our most important APIs: URLSession. If you’ve been wondering how to make a meaningful contribution, this is the perfect time.
>>> 
>>> It’d be great to greatly expand both unit test and higher level test coverage of URLSession. For testing that can’t really be part of a unit test and CI like poorly performing networks or esoteric configurations, it would also be nice to build a different kind of test tool. That tool would provide a lot of knobs for controlling a URLSession. We could make this tool part of the swift-corelibs-foundation project.
>>> 
>>> Is anyone interested in chipping in here? We don’t have to start big. Even small contributions could get us moving in the right direction.
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> - Tony
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> swift-corelibs-dev mailing list
>>> swift-corelibs-dev at swift.org <mailto:swift-corelibs-dev at swift.org>
>>> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-corelibs-dev <https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-corelibs-dev>
>>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> swift-corelibs-dev mailing list
>> swift-corelibs-dev at swift.org <mailto:swift-corelibs-dev at swift.org>
>> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-corelibs-dev <https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-corelibs-dev>
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-corelibs-dev/attachments/20170310/af7a160b/attachment.html>