TODO: docs

TODO: consider writing tests for the test runner.
TODO: actually write tests lol.
2026-05-16 17:42:40 +10:00 · 2026-05-16 17:42:40 +10:00 · 2026-05-16 17:42:40 +10:00 · 2026-05-16 17:42:40 +10:00 · 2026-05-16 17:42:40 +10:00 · 2026-05-16 17:42:40 +10:00
1 changed files with 11 additions and 4 deletions
--- a/cmd/mbf/internal/pkgserver/ui/jstest/jstest.ts
+++ b/cmd/mbf/internal/pkgserver/ui/jstest/jstest.ts
@@ -255,10 +255,17 @@ export class StreamReporter implements Reporter {
            // difficult, with reverse video often being the only way (which
            // also has questionable support across terminal emulators), and the
            // Unicode characters might be too small to be immediately
-            // noticeable. Emojis have an upper hand in that they're more common
+            // noticeable—consider ✓ and ⚠ and ✗. Emojis have an upper hand in
-            // than obscure Unicode characters—which also means you're more
+            // that they're more common than obscure Unicode characters—which
-            // likely to have an emoji font but not a font with those
+            // also means you're likely to have an emoji font but not a font for
-            // symbols—and that they're double-width.
+            // some weird symbols—and that they're double-width. Finally,
            // Unicode characters are often very different across fonts; some
            // fonts make ⚠ filled in, while others have just an outline for the
            // triangle (which is much harder to comprehend), and the various
            // crosses like all of x ⨯ × ✕ ✖ ✗ 🗙 🞨 🞩 🞪 🞫 🞬 🞭 🞮 look different
            // across different fonts, which makes using them for some specific
            // purpose difficult. Emojis don't have this problem because emoji
            // vendors try to make them look similar to each other.
            //
            // ¹This necessitates checking if the stream is a TTY, checking if
            //  $TERM is `dumb` when connected to a TTY, checking
Author	SHA1	Message	Date
kat	e5a4ad74bc	TODO: docs	2026-05-16 17:42:40 +10:00
kat	eb87bc5190	TODO: consider writing tests for the test runner.	2026-05-16 17:42:40 +10:00
kat	504c9e4239	TODO: actually write tests lol.	2026-05-16 17:42:40 +10:00
kat	1b79fbaaac	TODO: auto-load test files based on name, just like go (see long desc) squash this into the commit that first added all_tests.ts, we don't even want to have a trace of it left for the cli ones, we can simply iterate the filesystem relative our location. for the web one, we determine it on launch and expose it as an endpoint from the server which the client queries	2026-05-16 17:42:40 +10:00
kat	24b0320373	TODO: limited selective execution from cli (see long desc) well the problem with arbitrary selection is that... you need to do lots of matching, which is confusing too when you need to encode nesting. so what if just.. node cli.js index_test.js? this isn't concerned with reporters or execution, this happens at the cli level and it solely affects which modules are imported instead of just all_tests.js. alternatively, we could do suites instead of files. this is probably better huh because you don't need to type out all those file paths, and it doesn't punish large files (because a test file corresponds to a source code file) so we'd just import all_tests.js, then just filter out suites whose name doesn't match <input>, before calling `run` on it. deleting and filtering out suites should probably be methods on the registrar i suspect the impl will be tiny excl argument parser nonsense, so imo squash this into the commit that added registrars add a comment describing the use-case as “just run the tests i'm editing to save time”, rather than as skipping, then briefly mention why general purpose skipping is still a tentative future feature	2026-05-16 17:42:40 +10:00
kat	1b8dcf2683	TODO: display elapsed time (see long description) both on a test level and for the whole thing. i think the reporter or registrar abstractions should deal with all timeouts, and just feed elapsed time through all the functions: update() gets time for the specific test, and finalize passes you the total time. this way you don't need to do the same logic in every reporter, and you also give a suggestion to reporter writers (i.e.: you in the future) to expose test durations. actually tbh per-test isn't possible anywhere but in the executor, especially when taking potential future parallel execution into account on the topic of parallelism: per-test is wall clock for that test, regardless of perceived time, because no other number is useful. whole thing is wall clock too, not cpu time remember: - use monotonic clocks!! we need elapsed time, not absolute time - format them to more readable strings like “15h 12m” instead of “54738 seconds”. once things get large we can be less precise for the go reporter: ask ozy if the go one already measures it. if so then don't even bother serializing it for the stream reporter: the live feed should include per-test time in brackets or something. the final tree should only include timeout for outliers on the long side (just shove a box plot-esque algo on it), and if a flag is given print it for all nodes, and if another flag is given print the n longest tests. the total time should be in the summary line at the end in brackets à la pytest for the dom reporter, we do the same as with the stream reporter's outlier detection, and have a checkbox or button to dynamically show/hide all timeouts, and another button to toggle a widget of sorts that shows up right above the result tree which includes the n longest tests. all these buttons should be on the same line as the summary (successes/failures/skips). the total time should be included in the “execution finished” text form the previous commit, i.e. “execution finished in 15s”	2026-05-16 17:42:40 +10:00
kat	b09c4e9a1d	TODO: display text execution progress (see long description) since the test tree is statically known, we also statically know how many tests are present. we should hence be using this to provide a counter, say [1/48], to give a rough estimate as to when tests might finish. not a time estimate of course, since we can't determine that nota bene, we can't pass the current test count, and instead need to let the reporter deal with that, since otherwise we can't easily parallelize execution in the future. definitely mention this in a comment somewhere to elaborate on the design for the go reporter, ask ozy if go has any way to tell it this info. i doubt it since they don't have a statically known test count. if it does, then just send the count alongside the tree for the stream reporter, ignore it entirely; we don't even display successes by default so the number has nowhere to be attached to for the dom reporter, put it somewhere in the header, i think alongside the success/failure/skip count. something like “in progress (4/28)”. then once finalize() is called change the whole thing to “execution finished”	2026-05-16 17:42:40 +10:00
kat	35aca32338	cmd/mbf: jstest: implement skipping from within the DSL	2026-05-16 17:42:40 +10:00
kat	95e545b885	cmd/mbf: jstest: add JSON reporter for go test integration	2026-05-16 17:42:40 +10:00
kat	c1c985f7b1	cmd/mbf: jstest: implement DSL and runner	2026-05-16 17:42:40 +10:00
kat	d458966425	cmd/mbf: jstest: add DOM reporter	2026-05-16 17:42:40 +10:00
kat	5f80aab06e	cmd/mbf: jstest: add basic CLI reporter	2026-05-16 17:42:40 +10:00