On 01/21/2014 01:26 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
Currently we have a split with all the "source" code under various subdirectories of src/, while the test cases are (mostly) all under the tests/ directory. I think there could be some benefits to moving the test files to be alongside the source files being tested. eg instead of tests/virhashtest.c have src/util/virhashtest.c
The tests/ directory is getting reasonably large, and is likely to grow even more as we push for greater unit tests. We could split it up into various sub-directories mirroring the split of dirs under src/, but it seems easier to put have them directory under src/ and remove the arbitrary split of source and tests.
Having the test files alongside the source files makes it obvious to anyone looking in a directory that tests exist for a file. This might encourage people to think about adding tests when changing a source file. It also makes it more slightly obvious which files lack proper tests.
In essence I'm suggesting that our code file naming should be thus
virfoo.h - exports of module foo for general internal usage virfoo.c - implementation of module foo virfoopriv.h - exports of module foo for test suite usage only virfootest.c - implementation of tests for module foo virfoomock.c - implementation of LD_PRELOAD hack for module foo tests
Having things organized both in smaller chunks and with the test more closely related to the source does seem like a good idea. If there will be multiple test source files in a directory, perhaps we could have a "test" subdirectory for each source directory? And then of course there are the tests that exercise some lower level function at a higher level (e.g. the xml2argv tests, which are exercising stuff in both /conf and /qemu etc).