Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Split SWT_NO_EXIT_TESTS into SWT_NO_EXIT_TESTS and SWT_NO_PROCESS_SPAWNING. #769

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 17, 2024

Conversation

grynspan
Copy link
Contributor

@grynspan grynspan commented Oct 17, 2024

This PR separates out our process-spawning code to be guarded by SWT_NO_PROCESS_SPAWNING instead of SWT_NO_EXIT_TESTS. We do this so that we can potentially use process spawning on platforms where exit tests are not supported for some other reason (such as the iOS/Android sandboxes) but process spawning is still internally possible.

There are a few use cases we have for spawning processes that don't involve exit tests:

I took the opportunity to clean up WaitFor.swift a bit and rearrange code so that the "new platform, dunno who lives here" case should compile (although not function) out-of-the-box.

Checklist:

  • Code and documentation should follow the style of the Style Guide.
  • If public symbols are renamed or modified, DocC references should be updated.

Sorry, something went wrong.

Unverified

This user has not yet uploaded their public signing key.
…S_SPAWNING`.

This PR separates out our process-spawning code to be guarded by
`SWT_NO_PROCESS_SPAWNING` instead of `SWT_NO_EXIT_TESTS`. We do this so that we
can potentially use process spawning on platforms where exit tests are not
supported for some other reason (such as the iOS/Android sandboxes) but process
spawning is still internally possible.

There are a few use cases we have for spawning processes that don't involve exit
tests:

- Calling out to `tar` to compress attachments (see #714)
- Running non-Swift scripts in their interpreters (see #478)
- Multi-process parallelism (the XCTest model)

I took the opportunity to clean up WaitFor.swift a bit and rearrange code so
that the "new platform, dunno who lives here" case should compile (although not
function) out-of-the-box.
@grynspan grynspan added enhancement New feature or request exit-tests ☠️ Work related to exit tests attachments/activities 🖇️ Work related to attachments and/or activities labels Oct 17, 2024
@grynspan grynspan self-assigned this Oct 17, 2024
@grynspan
Copy link
Contributor Author

@swift-ci test

@grynspan grynspan added this to the Swift 6.1 milestone Oct 17, 2024
@grynspan grynspan merged commit 907b2ce into main Oct 17, 2024
3 checks passed
@grynspan grynspan deleted the jgrynspan/split-SWT_NO_EXIT_TESTS branch October 17, 2024 18:37
grynspan added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 18, 2024
This PR was supposed to be part of #769, but I must have blown away a local
commit because it didn't make it into that PR.

This PR updates Porting.md to explain when a developer might encounter an error
due to mismatched `SWT_` conditions. It ensures that exit tests require process
spawning to be enabled/implemented by adding a dependency between
`SWT_NO_PROCESS_SPAWNING` and `SWT_NO_EXIT_TESTS`.

This PR also tweaks which bits of `ExitTest` are exposed on platforms that do
not support exit tests at all. The type needs to be exposed so that
`ExitTest.Result` is exposed so that we can correctly expose
`#expect(exitsWith:)` and `#require(exitsWith:)` while marking them unavailable,
as opposed to hiding the macros and not giving a developer clear diagnostics.
grynspan added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 18, 2024
…s. (#772)

This PR was supposed to be part of #769, but I must have blown away a
local commit because it didn't make it into that PR.

This PR updates Porting.md to explain when a developer might encounter
an error due to mismatched `SWT_` conditions. It ensures that exit tests
require process spawning to be enabled/implemented by adding a
dependency between `SWT_NO_PROCESS_SPAWNING` and `SWT_NO_EXIT_TESTS`.

This PR also tweaks which bits of `ExitTest` are exposed on platforms
that do not support exit tests at all. The type needs to be exposed so
that `ExitTest.Result` is exposed so that we can correctly expose
`#expect(exitsWith:)` and `#require(exitsWith:)` while marking them
unavailable, as opposed to hiding the macros and not giving a developer
clear diagnostics.

### Checklist:

- [ ] Code and documentation should follow the style of the [Style
Guide](https://github.com/apple/swift-testing/blob/main/Documentation/StyleGuide.md).
- [ ] If public symbols are renamed or modified, DocC references should
be updated.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
attachments/activities 🖇️ Work related to attachments and/or activities enhancement New feature or request exit-tests ☠️ Work related to exit tests
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants