tests/examples/demos [was Re: Gmodule stuff.]

[Owen Taylor <otaylor redhat com>]

Tim Janik <timj gtk org> writes:

> > The point is: When we leave it in gmodule nobody will ever call it, whereas
> > when it is in the tests subdir (and in TESTS in tests/Makefile.am), it gets
> > called with 'make check'. We could of course add it to TESTS in
> > gmodule/Makefile.am, but that would not give the '5 of 10 tests failed'
> > message in the end, but different messages for the different subdirs. That's
> > why it seems like a good idea to move it to tests..
> 
> i know. however, the main point in testgmodule is to provide simple example
> code. if you think automated test are important for gmodule, i have nothing
> against (auto-)duplicating it in the tests dir, i just want it to not vanish
> from the gmodule subdir.

This brings up the issue of tests vs. examples vs. demos.

For GTK+, where we seem to be heading

 tests    - testgtk, testtext, testtextbuffer, etc.

 demos    - gtk-demo (demos/gtk-demo)

 examples - gtk-demo and also the examples/ directory of 
            examples extracted from the tutorial, though
            the quality of those, and even whether they'll
            compile with the current GTK+ is uncertain.

gtk-demo has the feature where the source code for each demo
is displayed, so the demos are meant to be clear and good
practice. (Various horrid things have been propagated around
the GTK+ world after having been included in testgtk to
test out some obscure bug...)

We haven't really tried to address this issue for GLib yet;
demos don't make a lot of sense, but I suppose that examples
might be a nice thing to have.

Regards,
                                        Owen