ES6 __proto__ test suite

David Bruant bruant.d at gmail.com
Wed Apr 24 03:14:07 PDT 2013


Le 23/04/2013 23:47, Rick Waldron a écrit :
> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 1:34 PM, David Bruant <bruant.d at gmail.com 
> <mailto:bruant.d at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Hi,
>
>     Based on recent messages on es-discuss, I feel that both
>     es-discuss and apparently even TC39 meetings with notes have left
>     ambiguity in what people understood the TC39 agreement was. I
>     believe this ambiguity is due to this pretty bad communication
>     format called the English language (For anyone in doubt, French is
>     as bad; I'm afraid it's a property inherent to natural languages
>     :-) ).
>
>     This is wasting everyone time and energy. This generate
>     frustration additional to the already existing frustration caused
>     by standardizing __proto__ at all.
>     So I would like to encourage TC39 to discuss around and create
>     consensus around a test suite. 
>
>
> Do you mean something other then the one that already exists?
>
> http://test262.ecmascript.org/#
If TC39 adds tests to this test suite *before* ES6 becomes an official 
standard, use this, yes. Please writes hundreds of tests for ES6.
For the anecdote, I've started a test suite for proxies [1] and the 
exercise led to feedback [2][3], some of which were spec bugs [4][5]. So 
I don't know, maybe there is some virtue to write tests before the spec 
is shipped. Not for the sake of writing tests or even the sake of 
getting a conformance test suite, but for the spec of spending time 
carefully reviewing the drafts and catching spec bugs early. For the 
sake of having a structured medium to discuss on and not just plain-text 
emails with occasional code snippets.

But I don't see TC39 adding tests. Worse, I see the same conversations 
happening over and over on __proto__. Even after the January TC39 
meeting. Even with the notes, ambiguities and misunderstanding remain.

So, until tests are added to http://test262.ecmascript.org/, I propose 
using a test suite not as a conformance tool, but as a conversation 
medium. This is an attempt to move the conversation from words like 
"poisoned", "realm", "magic" (!) to a conversation where there are a 
bunch (20, 50, 100?) of test cases where TC39 says "for all of these 
cases, we agree the test must pass" and where people can have a very 
concrete medium to point out and say "I agree this test must pass, but 
this more subtle test case must pass too" (refining the previous test case)

The goal of the test suite I have started is not to run it. It's for 
human beings to discuss around it; to read it, explain why they 
disagree, correct an existing test or add one for each disagreement. A 
communication medium in essence.
At this point, I believe that a test suite would be an excellent 
complement to meeting notes to capture consensus.

David

[1] https://github.com/DavidBruant/ProxyTests
[2] https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/2012-September/025032.html
[3] https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/2012-October/025555.html
[4] https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/2012-September/025033.html
[5] https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/2012-October/025615.html
[6] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=837627
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20130424/1af10b6e/attachment.html>


More information about the es-discuss mailing list