Bug 73208

Created attachment 116742 [details] Patch

Comment on attachment 116742 [details] Patch View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=116742&action=review > Tools/ChangeLog:3 > + Support hear documents in prepare-ChangeLog It's "here-document", not "hear document". You should fix this throughout the patch.

Created attachment 116752 [details] Patch

(In reply to comment #2) > (From update of attachment 116742 [details]) > View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=116742&action=review > > > Tools/ChangeLog:3 > > + Support hear documents in prepare-ChangeLog > > It's "here-document", not "hear document". You should fix this throughout the patch. Sorry, fixed it.

aroben: Would you please take a look?

Can you write a test for the get_function_line_ranges_for_perl() subroutine using the pattern in r100174 and r100287 for run-leaks? (I think Adam Roben tried this for another patch recently, but I wasn't sure if it didn't work due to how globals were used in the function he wanted to test, or how globals were used in general in prepare-ChangeLog.)

(In reply to comment #6) > Can you write a test for the get_function_line_ranges_for_perl() subroutine using the pattern in r100174 and r100287 for run-leaks? (I think Adam Roben tried this for another patch recently, but I wasn't sure if it didn't work due to how globals were used in the function he wanted to test, or how globals were used in general in prepare-ChangeLog.) Thanks, David. I do not know the convention of how to write tests for prepare-ChangeLog. - Create a new directory ./Tools/Scripts/webkitperl/prepare-ChangeLog-unittest. - Add a new test ./Tools/Scripts/webkitperl/prepare-ChangeLog-unittest/perl-file.pl, which is a perl script to compare the generated change logs by ../../prepare-ChangeLog and the expected change logs. Sounds fine?

(In reply to comment #6) > Can you write a test for the get_function_line_ranges_for_perl() subroutine using the pattern in r100174 and r100287 for run-leaks? (I think Adam Roben tried this for another patch recently, but I wasn't sure if it didn't work due to how globals were used in the function he wanted to test, or how globals were used in general in prepare-ChangeLog.) It was how globals were used in general that caused it not to be loadable as a module.

(In reply to comment #7) > (In reply to comment #6) > > Can you write a test for the get_function_line_ranges_for_perl() subroutine using the pattern in r100174 and r100287 for run-leaks? (I think Adam Roben tried this for another patch recently, but I wasn't sure if it didn't work due to how globals were used in the function he wanted to test, or how globals were used in general in prepare-ChangeLog.) > > Thanks, David. I do not know the convention of how to write tests for prepare-ChangeLog. > > - Create a new directory ./Tools/Scripts/webkitperl/prepare-ChangeLog-unittest. > - Add a new test ./Tools/Scripts/webkitperl/prepare-ChangeLog-unittest/perl-file.pl, which is a perl script to compare the generated change logs by ../../prepare-ChangeLog and the expected change logs. > > Sounds fine? The idea is that by including prepare-ChangeLog as a perl "module", you can unit-test individual subroutines without testing the whole process. (In reply to comment #8) > It was how globals were used in general that caused it not to be loadable as a module. Based on arboen's comment, though, it sounds like this won't work until prepare-ChangeLog is changed to use fewer global variables (or use them differently), so we can't write tests for it immediately.

(In reply to comment #9) > (In reply to comment #7) > > (In reply to comment #6) > (In reply to comment #8) > > It was how globals were used in general that caused it not to be loadable as a module. > > Based on arboen's comment, though, it sounds like this won't work until prepare-ChangeLog is changed to use fewer global variables (or use them differently), so we can't write tests for it immediately. aroben, ddkilzer: Thanks. I uploaded a patch to make prepare-ChangeLog a loadable Perl module (bug 73531). Would you please take a look at it?

(In reply to comment #10) > (In reply to comment #9) > > (In reply to comment #7) > > > (In reply to comment #6) > > (In reply to comment #8) > > > It was how globals were used in general that caused it not to be loadable as a module. > > > > Based on arboen's comment, though, it sounds like this won't work until prepare-ChangeLog is changed to use fewer global variables (or use them differently), so we can't write tests for it immediately. > > aroben, ddkilzer: Thanks. I uploaded a patch to make prepare-ChangeLog a loadable Perl module (bug 73531). Would you please take a look at it? Thanks for trying to make prepare-ChangeLog testable, but I think the initial patch in Bug 73531 does too much at once. It should be refactored in smaller steps, with tests written for each step. Or we should modify prepare-ChangeLog just enough so it can be loaded as a module like run-leaks.

(In reply to comment #11) > (In reply to comment #10) > > (In reply to comment #9) > > > (In reply to comment #7) > > > > (In reply to comment #6) > > > (In reply to comment #8) > > > > It was how globals were used in general that caused it not to be loadable as a module. > > > > > > Based on arboen's comment, though, it sounds like this won't work until prepare-ChangeLog is changed to use fewer global variables (or use them differently), so we can't write tests for it immediately. > > > > aroben, ddkilzer: Thanks. I uploaded a patch to make prepare-ChangeLog a loadable Perl module (bug 73531). Would you please take a look at it? > > Thanks for trying to make prepare-ChangeLog testable, but I think the initial patch in Bug 73531 does too much at once. It should be refactored in smaller steps, with tests written for each step. Or we should modify prepare-ChangeLog just enough so it can be loaded as a module like run-leaks. OK. I'll do it step by step (please see comments in bug 73531 for more details). ### Other than fixing this Perl here-document bug, I'd like to add an --overwrite option to prepare-ChangeLog. The --overwrite option would update the latest ChangeLog without deleting the descriptions that I've already wrote. This change definitely requires unit test cases, which require prepare-ChangeLog to be a loadable Perl module.

Created attachment 120510 [details] Patch

Uploaded a patch for review. It was a long way but this is the bug I originally wanted to fix:-)

Created attachment 121097 [details] rebased patch for review

Comment on attachment 121097 [details] rebased patch for review View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=121097&action=review r=me if you fix the function regex. Thanks for all the work getting to this point! > Tools/Scripts/prepare-ChangeLog:1294 > + if (/^sub\s+([\w\d]+)/) { Technically a subroutine in Perl can't start with a number but can contain underscores, so this should be something like this (untested): if (/^sub\s+([\w_][\w\d_]*)/) {

Committed r104401: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/104401>

(In reply to comment #16) > (From update of attachment 121097 [details]) > View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=121097&action=review > > Tools/Scripts/prepare-ChangeLog:1294 > > + if (/^sub\s+([\w\d]+)/) { > > Technically a subroutine in Perl can't start with a number but can contain underscores, so this should be something like this (untested): > > if (/^sub\s+([\w_][\w\d_]*)/) { Fixed it and committed. Thanks!