This is a discussion on Re: KUnitTest - KDE ; On Friday 21 October 2005 18:13, David Faure wrote: > On Friday 21 October 2005 17:35, Thomas Kadauke wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > I looked at the documentation of KUnitTest and saw that it's really > ...
On Friday 21 October 2005 18:13, David Faure wrote:
> On Friday 21 October 2005 17:35, Thomas Kadauke wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > I looked at the documentation of KUnitTest and saw that it's really
> > messed up, yet pretty easy to fix. But with QtTestLib (?) being used all
> > over the place, I wonder if KUnitTest is deprecated for 3.5 branch. If
> > not, I'd fix the documentation.
> KUnitTest is all we have in 3.x, but it's replaced by QtTestLib in 4.0.
> So in the long run kunittest is indeed deprecated/dead,
> but if you care about people developing code for KDE-3.5, then KUnitTest
> is the unit test lib to use. There is no QtTestLib for Qt-3.
I'd be pretty hesitant to write dox for this; it's not like KUnitTest is
widely used. There are surely more low-hanging fruit to be had (KAccel* comes
to mind, it's missing tons of things) as well as -- more important --
overview writing. Forward-porting dox is becoming harder as well,now that
char * name is gone everywhere and patches can't be applied. Frankly, I'm
starting to think that apidox volunteers -- as opposed to class / library
authors who are supposed to also maintain their apidox -- should be working
on KDE 4 dox, in spite of the volatility that's out there.
These are your friends - Adem
GPG: FEA2 A3FE Adriaan de Groot
>> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<