20,741
edits
Nasal Unit Testing Framework: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→Integration
| Line 131: | Line 131: | ||
People would only be likely to actually use that if they have a corresponding developers background, so it would need to be designed right into the framework and touch lots of places in $FG_ROOT and $FG_AIRCRAFT - I only see a handful of aircraft developers here who would go that route and actually have the mental capacity, and developer mentality to see the merits here. | People would only be likely to actually use that if they have a corresponding developers background, so it would need to be designed right into the framework and touch lots of places in $FG_ROOT and $FG_AIRCRAFT - I only see a handful of aircraft developers here who would go that route and actually have the mental capacity, and developer mentality to see the merits here. | ||
Probably,a handful of people would be able to use it, but if it's well documented, and if it actually supports features not provided otherwise, it could gain traction - so it would need to be more compelling than the current workflow obviously. | |||
A unit testing framework is definitely going to be useful for $FG_ROOT as a whole, not just aircraft/instrument developers. Obviously, one of the first steps will be documenting the whole thing with tutorials, so that people can start adopting it. | |||