-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 159
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conformance test runner #638
Conversation
This shouldnt be blocked anymore, right? |
I'm making changes now and testing to see how many I can get passing, but will open up soon (also want to update to most recent test-vectors commit) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good! One thing that we will want is the ability to run tests selectively in the case of specific test case failures, but we can add that in later.
@@ -49,16 +49,13 @@ pub trait Store { | |||
} | |||
|
|||
/// Write slice of KV pairs. | |||
fn bulk_write<K, V>(&self, keys: &[K], values: &[V]) -> Result<(), Error> | |||
fn bulk_write<K, V>(&self, values: &[(K, V)]) -> Result<(), Error> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Nice. This actually makes a lot more sense.
How do you expect this to happen? The test cases are based on the submodule json files so I don't see how you do this with rust's test framework. Are you suggesting an env variable with some regex for tests to run? The regex skipping system is a bit clunky because the test file has to be recompiled, but I don't see the problem with using it the way it is to do this |
Summary of changes
Changes introduced in this pull request:
Currently blocked on:
Reference issue to close (if applicable)
Closes #637
Other information and links