U++ forum: Welcome to the forum

New UPTs: "Function Test Frame" and "Function Test" [message #6876]

Sat, 02 December 2006 21:41

Werner
Messages: 234
Registered: May 2006
Location: Cologne / Germany

Experienced Member

I've written two UPTs (Ultimate++ Package Templates) which I publish in the hope that they might be useful for somebody.

Their common purpose is to simplify the creation and test of (non-member) functions which process textually representable values.

The 1st, "Function Test Frame", generates the files necessary to write and test functions, but these files lack almost all meaningful content. You still have to write/paste not only the function body but all the test logic, too. At least, the basic work has already been done - as the name implies: this UPT is just a package frame. And you have almost every freedom to do what you want to do ...

The 2nd, "Function Test", is a little bit more sophisticated. You still have to write/paste your own function body, but the complete test environment is already set up and ready to be used! On the other hand you are restricted with regard to return and parameter types. You can work with any combination of 0 up to 4 "bool", "int", "double", "String", "Date", and "Time" variables and references to these types. The return type may also be "void". Other stuff, pointers e. g., is not supposed to work unless you patch heavily.

You might want to consult the "FnTestFrame_FnTest" file in the attached ZIP-package to learn how to use these UPTs and what you can and cannot do with them.

Please tell me, not only if you find bugs, but also whether you find these UPTs useful or not.

Werner

P. S.:

The restriction to use only 6 and 4 parameters, respectively, is not "fundamental". The reason for these limits is the current layout of the "Create new package" window. If somebody really uses these UPTs and if there is a true need for more parameters, I'll ask Mirek to change the layout. (The labels and the input fields might be replaced by a scrollable 2-column ArrayControl with the 1st column being read-only. Furthermore, supplementary to "select" there might be a UPT feature which doesn't return the index value (as "select" does") but the indexed value itself ("index"?).)

W.

Attachment deleted! Please use the improved versions in the attachment to message #7264.

[Updated on: Wed, 20 December 2006 15:52]

Report message to a moderator