[Piglit] [PATCH v2 04/11] piglit-summary-py: Use the new summary class to generate HTML
baker.dylan.c at gmail.com
Wed May 22 13:43:25 PDT 2013
OK, I'm going to implement a newline separated list format for V3 of these
patches. If you want to rename the tests, just rename them in the json file.
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 1:39 PM, Eric Anholt <eric at anholt.net> wrote:
> Kenneth Graunke <kenneth at whitecape.org> writes:
> > On 05/19/2013 07:30 AM, Ken Phillis Jr wrote:
> >> On Sun, May 19, 2013 at 1:07 AM, Kenneth Graunke <kenneth at whitecape.org>
> >>> On 05/18/2013 09:35 PM, Dylan Baker wrote:
> >>>> My problem with the current list format is its too complex, and is
> >>>> trying to solve nonexistent problems. There is no reason one should
> >>>> to rename the test results in the HTML summary. It's only going to
> >>>> to headaches later on trying to identify what is actually in that
> >>>> "corrected name".
> >>>> I personally like either nothing, since it doesn't appear that is a
> >>>> popular feature, or a simple space, coma, or new line separated list
> >>>> results files. Its clean, simple, and doesn't require much
> >>> Personally, I see no value in the ability to load a list of results
> >>> Specifying them on the command line works just fine. I had assumed it
> was a
> >>> newline or space separated list, but apparently it's something more
> >>> complicated. I don't even know the syntax, and I've been using Piglit
> >>> years...
> >>> Does anybody even use that feature?
> >> Yes, I am actually one of the few users that use the list feature.
> > Okay, cool, so someone does use it...
> >> I also knew that the name override did not work. This probably was
> >> broken during one of the many changes to the piglit python scripts. As
> >> for reasons to use the override, It's mainly a convenience feature to
> >> help prevent people from having problems opening up the large results
> >> files that is produced during the quick-driver tests.
> >>> I also don't understand the need to rename the columns when specifying
> >>> result files. If I want to rename a result (usually because I typo'd
> >>> doing piglit-run), I just edit the file and change the name...
> >>> I'm not a fan of making this a fancy json syntax unless there's a real
> >>> compelling use case.
> >> The compelling reason is that it is not exactly easy for a lot of
> >> developers looking at getting into fixing bugs related to mesa that
> >> appear in piglit may not be able to handle the text editors nor have
> >> knowledge of the various text editors. I know that vi and nano can
> >> handle the larger files without a problem, but most of the time novice
> >> developers will open up the text file using the easier to handle x11
> >> based editors that are included with the desktop environment. This
> >> means that the text editors that are used will be gedit ( for gnome ),
> >> pluma ( for mate desktop), and whatever else is used in the other text
> >> editors. I have personally found that gedit (and pluma ) do not handle
> >> the large json results files very well even on a modern machine with 2
> >> gb (or more) of system memory
> > Frankly, the fact that gedit has trouble with this is just plain
> > embarassing. KDE's text editors (kwrite and kate) both handle these
> > files just fine...instantly available and ready to work with.
> > I would file a bug against those text editors. I don't think this is
> > something we should work around in Piglit.
> We shouldn't be working around bad text editors in piglit.
> Piglit mailing list
> Piglit at lists.freedesktop.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Piglit