Re: [PATCH olang 2/2] tests: add integration test setup

["Carlos Maniero" <carlos@maniero.me>]

Thanks for the feedback, I'll answer some of you questions here. The
ones I didn't address here is because I just agree and the fix will be
sent on the next patchset.

> What is the motivation behind segregate integration tests from unit
> tests?

I might be dreaming at this point, but I know you kinda share the same
dream of making olang a self-hosted language. With this in mind, I think
it is a good idea to have these two levels of testing: unit tests will
test c-related stuff and implementation details, while integration tests
will test the compiler features by calling the compiler with a
*system()* call.

When we start to rewrite the compiler in olang, the unit tests may
change because we gonna change the design of the compiler to remove the
"c-accent". On the other hand, integration tests should not be touched
during the rewriting process because the features will stay the same.

> What do you think about the /linter-fix/ and /linter/ scan all files
> instead of introducing new targets with -all suffix?

I like to have small targets that are composed this brings more
flexibility to my workflow, but I have no strong opinion with this one.
I'll change they in the reviewed patchset.

> nitpick: I cannot see a big benefit of adding an underscore for this
> property neither for methods.  I understand you want to communicate that
> it should not be access by other sources.
> 
> What do you think about making these "_" properties and functions
> static?

I love the idea.

> What is binary_loc? Does it means location or path?

Yeah! that name sucks. It is the compilation result binary path.
WDYT about rename it to *program_path*?

And sorry about the previous empty email, I've no idea what happened.