Just a test!

Torvalds states the obvious: file systems should be case-sensitive
Apparently, the Bcachefs people are having problems with case-folding, and Linus Torvalds himself is not happy about it. Torvalds holds the only right opinion in this matter, which is that filesystems should obviously be case-sensitive. Case-insensitive names are horribly wrong, and you shouldn’t have done them at all. The problem wasn’t the lack of testing, the problem was implementing it in the fir … ⌘ Read more

TacOS: an x86_64 UNIX-like OS from scratch
TacOS is a UNIX-like kernel which is able to run DOOM, among various other smaller userspace programs. It has things like a VFS, scheduler, TempFS, devices, context switching, virtual memory management, physical page frame allocation, and a port of Doom. It runs both on real hardware (tested on my laptop) and in the Qemu emulator. ↫ TacOS GitHub page TacOS – great name – is written in C, and explicitly a hobby and toy project. The code’s licensed … ⌘ Read more

@xuu@txt.sour.is or @kat@yarn.girlonthemoon.xyz Do either of you have time this weekend to test upgrading your pod to the new cacher branch? 🤔 It is recommended you take a full backup of you pod beforehand, just in case. Keen to get this branch merged and to cut a new release finally after >2 years 🤣

Tennis Balls
⌘ Read more

Linux on IBM Z and LinuxONE open source software report
Linux on IBM Z and IBM LinuxONE use the s390x hardware architecture to run various Linux distributions, including SUSE Linux Enterprise Server (SLES), Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL), and Ubuntu. Tens of thousands of software packages are tested and distributed through these projects, and various community distributions. ↫ Elizabeth K. Joseph at the IBM community website Various Linux distributions are available for the … ⌘ Read more

5 miles: 5.36 miles, 00:09:15 average pace, 00:49:34 duration
left leg was tight as hell and almost painful. taking it slow to test it out.
#running #treadmill

Windows Recall failed the moose test, and nobody will ever forget it
Ars Technica took a look at how the current version of Windows Recall works, including the improvements Microsoft made since the initial security nightmare of a rollout, and concludes: Recall continues to demand an extraordinary level of trust that Microsoft hasn’t earned. However secure and private it is—and, again, the version people will actually get is much better than the version that caused … ⌘ Read more

I’ll see if I can fix this and write a test case for what’s going on here. I think this is made difficult now because folks like @eapl.me@eapl.me decide that it’s okay to have a . (period) in their # nick 🤣 tbh I think nick(s) should have rules of what they can and cannot be comprised of. i.e: no punctuation 🤦‍♂️

Testing mentions, immediately followed by commas. Let’s see: @prologic@twtxt.net, this one is local, it might not break. Now, this one @ isn’t local. Nor this @ one. Will they break. Let’s find out!

Synology confirms that higher-end NAS products will require its branded drives
“Synology-branded drives will be needed for use in the newly announced Plus series, with plans to update the Product Compatibility List as additional drives can be thoroughly vetted in Synology systems,” a Synology representative told Ars by email. “Extensive internal testing has shown that drives that follow a rigorous validation process when paired with Synology systems are … ⌘ Read more

Scratch that, no bug in jenny. There’s actually a test case for this. Python normalizes -00:00 to +00:00, so the negative case never happens.

Hahaha! And now they show tiny! I had to reload the page. So, I see the problem on iOS and macOS Safari too. I have no other browser to test with, I exclusively use Safari.

@eapl.me@eapl.me You asked me for private keys for testing purposes. I have added it to the bottom of this page: https://dm-echo.andros.dev/
It will soon be running. It won’t be long now.

Test

Rust to C compiler – 95.9% test pass rate, odd platforms
Comments ⌘ Read more

Hmmm? Test?

Yup, it is certainly something on the codebase here. /end of test

@bender@twtxt.neteapl.me@eapl.me test

@bender@twtxt.neteapl.me@eapl.me just testing this mention, to see which random nick will be picked. Related, I agree, those animations are truly awesome!

Test:

this is a code block
[2025-04-08 17:50:00] with a timestamp in brackets

The end.

Test: An emoji 🐧

Test: Just ASCII

Sometimes, we spend months stuck in inertia, distracted by screens and routine. So I’d like to give you a simple reminder: creating-in whatever form-is what makes you feel alive.

The beauty of working on projects is not in their ‘success’, but in the simple act of working on them. Whether it’s writing, cooking, programming or redecorating the house: play with ideas without pressure, engage in an activity to test, fail and discover without judgement.

In the end, what remains is not a perfect product, but the satisfaction of completion and valuable lessons.

Find a project, no matter how small, and let it take you without expectations.

Setup QEMU Output to Serial Console and Automate Tests with Shell Scripts (2019)
Comments ⌘ Read more

A Man Out to Prove How Dumb AI Still Is
Comments ⌘ Read more

webmention test: https://turner.enemyterritory.org/shared/repo/user/carrvo/profile/webmentions.html

What, exactly, is an ‘AI Agent’? Here’s a litmus test
Comments ⌘ Read more

Un petit test sur le domaine 0xe9.net

I now subscribed to most feeds in my Go tt reimplementation that I already followed with the old Python tt. Previously, I just had a few feeds for testing purposes in my new config. While transfering, I “dropped” heaps of feeds that appeared to be inactive.

This might motivate me to actually “finish” the new client, so that it could become my daily driver. No need to use the old software stack any longer. Let’s see how bad this goes.

@eapl.me@eapl.me Thank you for this!

I cast a test vote. Did it work? :-)

@kat@yarn.girlonthemoon.xyz UPDATE I DID IT!!!!!!! you will now see a cute anime girl that is behind the scenes testing if you are a bot or not in a matter of seconds before being redirected to the site :) https://superlove.sayitditto.net/

GNOME 48 released
One of the two major open source desktop environments, GNOME, just released version 48, and it’s got some very big and welcome improvements. First and foremost there’s dynamic triple-buffering, a feature that took over five years of extensive testing to get ready. It will improve the smoothness and fluidity of animations and other movements on the screen, as it did for KDE when it landed there in the middle of last year. GNOME 48 also brings notification stacking, combining notifications from th … ⌘ Read more

New article: “E2E Testing with TestCafe on Docker.”
I’ll show you how to get started with TestCafe, a framework for performing E2E tests.
https://programadorwebvalencia.com/pruebas-e2e-con-testcafe-sobre-docker/
#docker #testcafe #e2e #testing #javascript #webdev

Today I learned how to use TestCafé. It is a E2E framework.
I needed it because I wanted to write a script that would launch a browser in the background, log me in with a username and password, and return the cookie value with the token ID. The goal is to perform tests with the token.
https://testcafe.io/

#testing @ Hi Bob, nice to meet you!

Thanks, @xuu@txt.sour.is, great explanation. In another project I’ve structured it exactly like you wrote. The mock storage over there extends the SQLite storage and provides mechanism to return errors and such for testing purposes:

• storage/ defines the interface
  
  • sqlite/ implements the storage interface
    
  • mock/ extends the SQLite implementation by some mocking capabilities and assertions
    

Here, however, there are no storage subpackages. It’s just storage, that’s it. Everything is in there. The only implementation so far is an SQLite backend that resides in storage. My RAM storage is exactly that SQLite storage, but with :memory: instead a backing file on disk. I do not have a mock storage (yet).

I have to think about it a bit more, but I probably have to do exactly that in my tt rewrite, too. Sigh. I just have the feeling that in storage/sqlite/sqlite_test.go I cannot import storage/mock for the helper because storage/mock/mock.go imports and embeds the type from storage/sqlite. But I’m too tired right now to think clearly.

@lyse@lyse.isobeef.org OK. So how I have worked things like this out is to have the interface in the root package from the implementations. The interface doesn’t need to be tested since it’s just a contract. The implementations don’t need to import storage.Storage

• storage/ defines the Storage interface (no tests!)
  
  • storage/sqlite for the sqlite implementation tests for sqlite directly
    
  • storage/ram for the ram implementation and tests for RAM directly
    
• controller/ can now import both storage and the implementation as needed.
  

So now I am guessing you wanted the RAM test for testing queries against sqlite and have it return some query response?

For that I usually would register a driver for SQL that emulates sqlite. Then it’s just a matter of passing the connection string to open the registered driver on setup.

https://github.com/glebarez/go-sqlite?tab=readme-ov-file#connection-string-examples

@xuu@txt.sour.is My layout looks like this:

• storage/
  
  • storage.go: defines a Storage interface
    
  • sqlite.go: implements the Storage interface
    
  • sqlite_test.go: originally had a function to set up a test storage to test the SQLite storage implementation itself: newRAMStorage(testing.T, $initialData) *Storage
    
• controller/
  
  • feeds.go: uses a Storage
    
  • feeds_test.go: here I wanted to reuse the newRAMStorage(…) function
    

I then tried to relocate the newRAMStorage(…) into a

• teststorage/
  
  • storage.go: moved here as NewRAMStorage(…)
    

so that I could just reuse it from both

• storage/
  
  • sqlite_test.go: uses testutils.NewRAMStorage(…)
    
• controller/
  
  • feeds_test.go: uses testutils.NewRamStorage(…)
    

But that results into an import cycle, because the teststorage package imports storage for storage.Storage and the storage package imports testutils for testutils.NewRAMStorage(…) in its test. I’m just screwed. For now, I duplicated it as newRAMStorage(…) in controller/feeds_test.go.

I could put NewRAMStorage(…) in storage/testutils.go, which could be guarded with //go:build testutils. With go test -tags testutils …, in storage/sqlite_test.go could just use NewRAMStorage(…) directly and similarly in controller/feeds_test.go I could call storage.NewRamStorage(…). But I don’t know if I would consider this really elegant.

The more I think about it, the more appealing it sounds. Because I could then also use other test-related stuff across packages without introducing other dedicated test packages. Build some assertions, converters, types etc. directly into the same package, maybe even make them methods of types.

If I went that route, I might do the opposite with the build tag and make it something like !prod instead of testing. Only when building the final binary, I would have to specify the tag to exclude all the non-prod stuff. Hmmm.

maybe even an internal that has the shared test stuff

Dang it! I ran into import cycles with shared test utilities again. :-( Either I have to copy this function to set up an in-memory test storage across packages or I have to put it in the storage package itself and guard it with a build tag that is only used in tests (otherwise I end up with this function in my production binary as well). I don’t like any of the alternatives. :-(

HeliBoard might be the first one of these fully open source Android keyboards, that doesn’t suck, idk, I’m still in the process of testing it, but I already like it a lot more than any of the ones I used before it.

Setting it up was somewhat clunky, but once you set it all up and dile in the settings, the keyboard itself, feels really great to use.

Amd of course, TDD! I tried that, but it doesn’t work all that great for me in its strict form. I have the feeling that coming up with a single new failing test, making it pass, maybe some refactoring, rinse and repeat wastes significantly more time than doing it in – what they call – the “bundle” approach. Coming up with several tests in advance and then writing the code or vise versa is usually much quicker. I do find that more enjoyable, it also helps me to reduce smaller context switches. I can focus on either the tests or the production code.

As for the potentially reduced code coverage with a non-TDD approach, I can easily see which parts are lacking tests and hand them in later. So, that’s largely a specious argument. Granted, I can forget to check the coverage or simply ignore it.

I agree with John, TDD results in less elegant code or requires more refactoring to tidy it up. Sometimes, it’s also not entirely clear at the beginning how the API should really look like. It doesn’t happen often, but it does happen. Especially when experimenting or trying out different approaches. With TDD, I then also have to refactor the tests which is not only annoying, but also involves the danger of accidentally breaking them.

TDD only works really well, if you have super tiny functions. But we already established that I typically don’t like tiny methods just for the purpose of them being extremely short.

When fixing a bug, I usually come up with a failing test case first to verify that my repaired code later actually resolves the problem. For new code, it depends, sometimes tests first, sometimes the productive code first. Starting off with the tests requires the API to be well defined beforehand.

@andros@twtxt.andros.dev Just before the pandemic, we watched Uncle Bob videos once a week in the lunch break. While almost all of my old teammates agreed with his views, I partially found them to be very odd and even counterproductive.

I didn’t come across John Ousterhout or any of his work before, at least not deliberately. So, this document is my first contact.

I only finished the chapter on comments and I totally agree with John so far. This document just manifests to me how weird Bob’s view is on certain subjects.

I always disagreed with the concept of a maximum method length. Sure, generally, shorter functions are probably better, but it always depends. And I’ve certainly seen super short methods that just made the code flow even worse to follow. While “one function should only do one thing” is a nice general rule, I’m 100% in team John with the shown examples. There are cases, where this doesn’t help readability at all. Not even close.

To me, a function always has to justify its existence. Either by reusing it at least at another place or by coming up with dedicated tests for it. But if it is just called once and there are no tests, I almost always decide against it. Personally, I don’t mind longer methods. We just recently had a discussion about that and I lost against two other workmates who are more in Uncle Bob’s camp, they refactored one medium sized method into three very short ones. Luckily, we agree on most other topics.

Lol, what!? The shorter the method, the longer the variables inside? I first thought I misread or the writeup mixed it up. I’ll always do it the other way around.

I’ve been also bitten badly by outdated comments in the past, but Bob must have worked on really terrible projects to end up with such an attitude to dislike comments. Oh well. No doubt, I’ve come across by several orders of magnitude more useless comments, in my experience (autogenerated) JavaDocs fall in the category more frequently than not. So, I know that there are different types of comments. A comment doesn’t automatically mean that it is good and justified.

But I also partially agree with Bob and John and think that a good name has a proper chance to save a comment. Though, when in doubt, I go John’s route and use a shorter name with a comment rather than use a kilometer long identifier. Writing good comments typically takes some time, sometimes much longer than writing the code. It regularly takes me several minutes. It’s a hard art.

I perhaps should read up on John’s work. He seems to be more reasonable and likeminded. :-) Let me continue to complete this document.

This document is the result of a series of discussions between Robert “Uncle Bob” Martin and John Ousterhout, held between September 2024 and February 2025. The text addresses three main topics: method length, comments, and Test Driven Development (TDD).
https://github.com/johnousterhout/aposd-vs-clean-code/blob/main/README.md
This is something to read and reflect on for days.

Testing out this image upload feature…

My hypothesis about that thing breaking my twts is that it might have something to do with the parenthesis surrounding the root twt hash in the replay twt-A when I replay to it with fork-twt-B; I imagine elisp interpreting those as a s-expression thus breaking the generation precess of hash (#twt-A) before prepending it to for-twt-B … but then I’m too ignorant to figure out how to test my theory (heck I couldn’t even recalculate the hashes myself correctly in bash xD). I’ll keep trying tho.

@andros@twtxt.andros.dev yes, that usually happens when twts get edited and we just made a gentlemen agreement to avoid edits as much as possible (at least for the time being). But the thing is, That is not what’s happening with my broken twts’ hashes. Since I’ve bee mostly replaying to my own twts as a test and I know for sure that I haven’t edited any. (I usually fork-replay instead of edit a twt when needed)

the hash in that test replay should have been s243lua instead 🤷

@andros@twtxt.andros.dev Here’s that twtxt-el test replay to my last twt! let’s see how it goes.