[Laszlo-dev] Fwd: [dojo-contributors] jum / rhino improvements

[Jim Grandy]

Maybe it'll be time soon to take another drop of the Rhino fake DOM  
from dojo?

At the least, it might be a good idea if you emailed Jesse Kuhnert  
and chatted about where they are going with JUM etc.

jim

Begin forwarded message:

> From: "Jesse Kuhnert" <jkuhnert at gmail.com>
> Date: August 28, 2006 12:53:04 PM PDT
> To: "dojo dev." <dojo-contributors at dojotoolkit.org>
> Subject: [dojo-contributors] jum / rhino improvements
> Reply-To: "dojo dev." <dojo-contributors at dojotoolkit.org>
>
> I don't think the changes I've made locally are nearly clean  
> enough, but thought I'd give people a heads up so I can collab on  
> this with whoever I need to collab with.
>
> -) hostenv_rhino : I've added a working setTimeout function using  
> java threads. (it's all in javascript, no magic coming from outside  
> hostenv_rhino ).
>
> -) Based on the above working I've modified RhinoIO to be able to  
> make calls async or sync.
>
> -) Have discovered that JUM has all manner of hidden goodies that  
> we haven't really started using yet. Like grouping tests (and being  
> able to run individual groups only), pausing/resuming of async  
> operations (assumedly useful for certain deferred situations),  
> being able to run one test individually, etc...
>
> The last part having to do with JUM is what I wanted to pause on  
> and look at more closely so that I can enhance/extend the current  
> ant task to support all of these concepts more clearly. Also wanted  
> to be sure I got file / line number reporting from jum assertions  
> correctly..
>
> None of this should affect the existing build.xml logic for  
> executing tests, but of course I would eventually like to have that  
> use our new ant task at some point. (When everyone has more time to  
> evaluate/etc what is happening under tools...We also have to decide  
> on a min jre version to support...)
>
> This is all of course only temporary improvements until a mutually  
> agreed upon decision can be made wrt the build system. (a  
> discussion I'm anticipating will come up at some point in the  
> future, as the outcome will possibly change the tools used/what we  
> are capable of testing...which could be much much more :) )
>
> -- 
> Jesse Kuhnert
> Tapestry/Dojo/(and a dash of TestNG), team member/developer
>
> Open source based consulting work centered around dojo/tapestry/ 
> tacos/hivemind. http://blog.opencomponentry.com
> _______________________________________________
> dojo-contributors mailing list
> dojo-contributors at dojotoolkit.org
> http://dojotoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/dojo-contributors

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.openlaszlo.org/pipermail/laszlo-dev/attachments/20060828/3571de63/attachment-0001.html