<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><div class="">One more thing:</div><br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Jan 6, 2016, at 1:52 PM, Max Howell via swift-evolution <<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" class="">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class="">Notably: currently the tests compile to executables, so once they are built you can run them independently. I intend to keep this design, if possible.</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"></div></blockquote></div><br class=""><div class="">…if I am interpreting this correctly, I’m not sure I like it and I realized another issue isn’t being explicitly-addressed in the proposal:</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">- If there is test-only utility code, where does it live? How much visibility do the various test modules have into each other?</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">…and seeing that the tests are currently intended to get compiled to individual executables makes me at least a little concerned that the answer might be “they have no such mutual visibility”.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Can the document at least clarify the intended/philosophical outlook here? </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">I ask b/c I’ve found that it isn’t that uncommon in certain cases to wind up with data-driven tests; e.g. the actual input-output pairs might live in some JSON/XML/whatever, and the test code just imports-and-parses them, checks your code against them, and complains about mis-matches.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">At present it’s easy to create-and-use such test-specific helper code; it’s not clear if that’s the case under the proposal. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Relatedly, I’m aware that resource-packing is currently a “future feature” for the PM itself, so I don’t begrudge it’s not being handled in this proposal; nevertheless it seems important enough to also go into a section touching on “future directions/future goals”.</div></body></html>