bb49f1be78
ended up not even using the class, it just came from there It actually compiles methods, and it turns out is the point where builtin comes into the picture as it's boot process also returns method compilers |
||
|---|---|---|
| .. | ||
| arm | ||
| bench | ||
| elf | ||
| lib | ||
| mains | ||
| mom | ||
| parfait | ||
| risc | ||
| rubyx | ||
| support | ||
| util | ||
| 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