Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2015 22:28:19 +0200 From: magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: Proposal for --test-full logic On 28/09/15 16:39, jfoug wrote: > Solar, > > I know this has been a pet project which you have spear-headed for > GSOC. I would like to propose this change in logic. > > currently, -test and -test-full both perform tests, and then perform > benchmarks. I would propose that for -test-full, we remove that > benchmark logic, and instead use the optional param to give indication > for more tests to be run, where some of the 'deeper' tests may not be > fully fixed in all formats. > > So --test-full or --test-full=0 would run a specific level. This would > be all tests which we would 'expect' to run without errors (possibly > with a format or 2 in whitelist). This would be very useful for adding > to our CI environments, to use this vs using the --test=0 which is used > today. Fair enough. The downside is --test-full won't be able to give a benchmark figure. But I can't see much reason for it to do so. Solar, you will never merge the --test-full into core, right? So we can change it in Jumbo? magnum
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.