07ed16d765
especially positioning makes the previous interpreter approach to fragile (too far off the real thing) Interpreter should be it’s own platform (still use the risc instructions), get a translator and use positions |
||
|---|---|---|
| .. | ||
| arm | ||
| bench | ||
| elf | ||
| lib | ||
| mom | ||
| parfait | ||
| risc | ||
| support | ||
| vool | ||
| helper.rb | ||
| README.md | ||
| test_all.rb | ||
Testing
Testing is off course great, and well practised in the ruby community. Good tests exists in the parts where functionality is clear: Parsing and binary generation.
But it is difficult to write tests when you don't know what the functionality is. Also TDD does not really help as it assumes you know what you're doing.
I used minitest as the framework, just because it is lighter and thus when the time comes to move to rubyx, less work.
All
'''' ruby test/test_all.rb ''''
Parfait
Well, test Parfait. Not perfect, but growing as bugs appear. Basics are ok though.
Compiler
Different kinds of quite minimal tests that ensure we can go from parsed to code.
Fragments
Much more elaborate tests of the compling functionality. All code constructs and their output in terms of instructions are tested.
vm
Mostly tests about the Parfait compatibility layer and padding (for assmenbly). Slightly bad name ... wip