Skip to content

Commit ff379e8

Browse files
committed
Review feedback
1 parent 07f45fa commit ff379e8

File tree

1 file changed

+37
-35
lines changed

1 file changed

+37
-35
lines changed

proposals/testing/NNNN-targeted-interoperability-swift-testing-and-xctest.md

Lines changed: 37 additions & 35 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -12,10 +12,10 @@
1212
Many projects want to migrate from XCTest to Swift Testing, and may be in an
1313
intermediate state where test helpers written using XCTest API are called from
1414
Swift Testing. Today, the Swift Testing and XCTest libraries stand mostly
15-
independently, which means an `XCTAssert` failure in a Swift Testing test is
16-
silently ignored. To address this, we formally declare a set of interoperability
17-
principles and propose changes to the handling of specific APIs that will enable
18-
users to migrate with confidence.
15+
independently, which means an `XCTAssert` failure in a Swift Testing test or an
16+
`#expect` failure in an XCTest test is silently ignored. To address this, we
17+
formally declare a set of interoperability principles and propose changes to the
18+
handling of specific APIs that will enable users to migrate with confidence.
1919

2020
## Motivation
2121

@@ -44,19 +44,21 @@ class FooTests: XCTestCase {
4444
}
4545
```
4646

47-
Generally, we get into trouble today when ALL the following conditions are met:
47+
Generally, you encounter the above limitation with testing APIs when _all_ the
48+
following conditions are met:
4849

4950
- You call XCTest API in a Swift Testing test, or call Swift Testing API in a
5051
XCTest test,
5152
- The API doesn't function as expected in some or all cases, and
5253
- You get no notice at build time or runtime about the malfunction
5354

5455
For the remainder of this proposal, we’ll describe test APIs which exhibit this
55-
problem as **lossy without interop**.
56+
limitation as **lossy without interop**.
5657

57-
This problem risks regressing test coverage for projects which migrate to Swift
58-
Testing. Furthermore, projects that have switched completely to Swift Testing
59-
may want to go and ensure they don't inadvertently add XCTest API.
58+
You could regress test coverage if you migrate to Swift Testing without
59+
replacing usage of lossy without interop test APIs. Furthermore, you may want to
60+
ensure you don't inadvertently introduce new XCTest API after completing your
61+
Swift Testing migration.
6062

6163
## Proposed solution
6264

@@ -106,7 +108,7 @@ We also propose highlighting usage of above XCTest APIs in Swift Testing:
106108

107109
- **Report [runtime warning issues][]** for XCTest API usage in Swift Testing.
108110
This **applies to both assertion failures _and successes_**! This notifies you
109-
about opportunities to modernise even if your tests currently pass.
111+
about opportunities to modernize even if your tests currently pass.
110112

111113
- Opt-in **strict interop mode**, where XCTest API usage will result in
112114
`fatalError("Usage of XCTest API in a Swift Testing context is unsupported")`.
@@ -123,7 +125,8 @@ Here are some concrete examples:
123125

124126
We propose supporting the following Swift Testing APIs in XCTest:
125127

126-
- `#expect` and `#require`
128+
- [`#expect` and `#require`][Swift Testing expectations]
129+
- Includes [`#expect(throws:)`][testing for errors]
127130
- Includes [exit testing][]
128131
- `withKnownIssue`: marking an XCTest issue in this way will generate a runtime
129132
warning issue. In strict interop mode, this becomes a `fatalError`.
@@ -144,7 +147,7 @@ is analogous to `XCTSkip`. If that pitch were accepted, this proposal would
144147
support interop of the new API with XCTest.
145148

146149
On the other hand, [traits][] are a powerful Swift Testing feature which is not
147-
related to any functionality in XCTest. Therefore, there would be
150+
related to any functionality in XCTest. Therefore, there would not be
148151
interoperability for traits under this proposal.
149152

150153
Here are some concrete examples:
@@ -174,21 +177,18 @@ Here are some concrete examples:
174177
Configure the interoperability mode when running tests using the
175178
`SWIFT_TESTING_XCTEST_INTEROP_MODE` environment variable:
176179

177-
| Interop Mode | Issue behaviour across framework boundary | `SWIFT_TESTING_XCTEST_INTEROP_MODE` |
180+
| Interop Mode | Issue behavior across framework boundary | `SWIFT_TESTING_XCTEST_INTEROP_MODE` |
178181
| ------------ | -------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------- |
179-
| Advisory | XCTest API: ⚠️ Runtime Warning Issue. All Issues: ⚠️ Runtime Warning Issue | `warning-only` |
182+
| Advisory | XCTest API: ⚠️ Runtime Warning Issue. All Issues: ⚠️ Runtime Warning Issue | `advisory` |
180183
| Permissive | XCTest API: ⚠️ Runtime Warning Issue. All Issues: ❌ Test Failure | `permissive`, or empty value, or invalid value |
181184
| Strict | XCTest API: 💥 `fatalError`. Swift Testing API: ❌ Test Failure | `strict` |
182185

183-
### Phased Rollout
186+
## Source compatibility
184187

185188
When interoperability is first available, "permissive" will be the default
186-
interop mode enabled for new projects. In a future release, "strict" will become
187-
the default interop mode.
188-
189-
## Source compatibility
189+
interop mode enabled for new projects.
190190

191-
As the main goal of interoperability is to change behaviour, this proposal will
191+
As the main goal of interoperability is to change behavior, this proposal will
192192
lead to situations where previously "passing" test code now starts showing
193193
failures. We believe this should be a net positive if it can highlight actual
194194
bugs you would have missed previously.
@@ -199,31 +199,31 @@ interoperability.
199199

200200
## Integration with supporting tools
201201

202-
Interoperability will be first available in future toolchain version,
203-
hypothetically named `6.X`, where permissive interop mode will be enabled for
204-
projects. After that, a `7.Y` release would make strict interop mode the
205-
default.
206-
207202
- Swift packages: `swift-tools-version` declared in Package.swift will be used
208203
to determine interop mode, regardless of the toolchain used to run tests.
204+
Specifically, it will use the default interop mode associated with that
205+
toolchain version ("permissive" for the initial release version).
209206

210-
- Otherwise, installed toolchain version will be used to determine interop mode.
207+
- Otherwise, the default interop mode associated with the installed toolchain
208+
version will be used to determine interop mode.
211209

212210
- Any project can use `SWIFT_TESTING_XCTEST_INTEROP_MODE` to override interop
213-
mode at runtime, provided they are on toolchain version `6.X` or newer
211+
mode at runtime.
214212

215213
## Future directions
216214

217215
There's still more we can do to make it easier to migrate from XCTest to Swift
218216
Testing:
219217

218+
- In a future release, we would consider making strict interop mode the default.
219+
220220
- Provide fixups at compile-time to replace usage of XCTest API with the
221221
corresponding Swift Testing API, e.g. replace `XCTAssert` with `#expect`.
222222
However, this would require introspection of the test body to look for XCTest
223223
API usage, which would be challenging to do completely and find usages of this
224224
API within helper methods.
225225

226-
- After new API is added to Swift Testing in future, will need to evaluate for
226+
- When new API is added to Swift Testing, we will need to evaluate it for
227227
interoperability with XCTest.
228228

229229
## Alternatives considered
@@ -263,16 +263,16 @@ that we want users to migrate to Swift Testing.
263263
However, we are especially sensitive to use cases that depend upon the currently
264264
lossy without interop APIs. With strict interop mode, the test process will
265265
crash on the first instance of XCTest API usage in Swift Testing, completely
266-
halting testing. In this same scenario, the default permissive interop mode
267-
would record a runtime warning issue and continue the remaining test, which we
268-
believe strikes a better balance between notifying users yet not being totally
269-
disruptive to the testing flow.
266+
halting testing. In this same scenario, the proposed default permissive interop
267+
mode would record a runtime warning issue and continue the remaining test, which
268+
we believe strikes a better balance between notifying users yet not being
269+
totally disruptive to the testing flow.
270270

271271
### Alternative methods to control interop mode
272272

273273
- **Build setting:** e.g. a new `SwiftSetting` that can be included in
274-
Package.swift or an Xcode project. A project could then configure their test
275-
targets to have a non-default interop mode.
274+
Package.swift. A project could then configure their test targets to have a
275+
non-default interop mode.
276276

277277
However, interop is a runtime concept, and would be difficult or at least
278278
non-idiomatic to modify with a build setting.
@@ -292,11 +292,13 @@ Thanks to Stuart Montgomery, Jonathan Grynspan, and Brian Croom for feedback on
292292
the proposal.
293293

294294
[XCTest assertions]: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/xctest/equality-and-inequality-assertions
295+
[Swift Testing expectations]: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/testing/expectations
296+
[Testing for errors]: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/testing/testing-for-errors-in-swift-code
295297
[XCTest attachments]: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/xctest/adding-attachments-to-tests-activities-and-issues
296298
[unconditional failure]: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/xctest/unconditional-test-failures
297299
[runtime warning issues]: https://github.com/swiftlang/swift-evolution/blob/main/proposals/testing/0013-issue-severity-warning.md
298300
[expected failures]: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/xctest/expected-failures
299301
[issue handling traits]: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/testing/issuehandlingtrait
300302
[test cancellation]: https://forums.swift.org/t/pitch-test-cancellation/81847
301-
[traits]: https://swiftpackageindex.com/swiftlang/swift-testing/main/documentation/testing/traits
303+
[traits]: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/testing/traits
302304
[exit testing]: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/testing/exit-testing

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)