Split unittest tests into separate test files.

pkg/unittest/test/unittest_test_utils.dart

Index: pkg/unittest/test/unittest_test_utils.dart
===================================================================
--- pkg/unittest/test/unittest_test_utils.dart	(revision 0)
+++ pkg/unittest/test/unittest_test_utils.dart	(revision 0)
@@ -0,0 +1,95 @@
+// Copyright (c) 2013, the Dart project authors.  Please see the AUTHORS file
+// for details. All rights reserved. Use of this source code is governed by a
+// BSD-style license that can be found in the LICENSE file.
+
+part of unittestTest;
+
+Future _defer(void fn()) {
+  return new Future.sync(fn);
+}
+
+String buildStatusString(int passed, int failed, int errors,
+                         var results,
+                         {int count: 0,
+                         String setup: '', String teardown: '',
+                         String uncaughtError: null,
+                         String message: ''}) {
+  var totalTests = 0;
+  var testDetails = new StringBuffer();
+  if(results == null) {
+    // no op
+    assert(message == '');
+  } else if (results is String) {
+    totalTests = passed + failed + errors;
+    testDetails.write(':$results:$message');
+  } else {
+    totalTests = results.length;
+    for (var i = 0; i < results.length; i++) {
+      testDetails.write(':${results[i].description}:'
+          '${collapseWhitespace(results[i].message)}');
+    }
+  }
+  return '$passed:$failed:$errors:$totalTests:$count:'
+      '$setup:$teardown:$uncaughtError$testDetails';
+}
+
+class TestConfiguration extends Configuration {
+
+  // Some test state that is captured.
+  int count = 0; // A count of callbacks.
+  String setup = ''; // The name of the test group setup function, if any.
+  String teardown = ''; // The name of the group teardown function, if any.
+
+  // The port to communicate with the parent isolate
+  final SendPort _port;
+  String _result;
+
+  TestConfiguration(this._port);
+
+  void onSummary(int passed, int failed, int errors, List<TestCase> results,
+      String uncaughtError) {
+    _result = buildStatusString(passed, failed, errors, results,
+        count: count, setup: setup, teardown: teardown,
+        uncaughtError: uncaughtError);
+  }
+
+  void onDone(bool success) {
+    _port.send(_result);

[kustermann, 2013/08/02 12:41:01]

You are overriding a method here!

'Configuration.onInit()' does:
- create a new ReceivePort
- print "unittest-suite-wait-for-done"

'Configuration.onDone()' does:
- close the ReceivePort opened by 'Configuration.onInit()'
- print "unittest-suite-success"

There are two issues here:

a) By overriding 'Configuration.onDone()' and not calling the 'super.onDone()'
you leak the ReceivePort, which means that the isolate will stay alive. I'm
highly confident that this was  the reason why we got an out-of-memory crashes
of unittest_test.dart on DRT/ContentShell.

b) Even though you run some parts of the unittest framework in an isolate, you
are still printing the "unittest-suite-wait-for-done" messages. These have a
semantic meaning: These messages are used to communicate with the testing
driver.

In particular b) is very crucial: please make sure that the tests you run inside
an isolate have no side-effects / don't communicate with the testing driver.

+  }
+}
+
+makeDelayedSetup(index, s) => () {
+  return new Future.delayed(new Duration(milliseconds:1), () {
+    s.write('l$index U ');
+  });
+};
+
+makeDelayedTeardown(index, s) => () {
+  return new Future.delayed(new Duration(milliseconds:1), () {
+    s.write('l$index D ');
+  });
+};
+
+makeImmediateSetup(index, s) => () {
+  s.write('l$index U ');
+};
+
+makeImmediateTeardown(index, s) => () {
+  s.write('l$index D ');
+};
+
+runTestInIsolate() {
+  port.receive((_, sendport) {
+    var testConfig = new TestConfiguration(sendport);
+    unittestConfiguration = testConfig;
+    testFunction(testConfig);
+  });
+}
+
+main() {
+  spawnFunction(runTestInIsolate)
+      .call('')
+      .then((String msg) {
+        expect(msg.trim(), equals(expected));
+      });

[kustermann, 2013/08/02 12:41:01]

How do you ensure that this closure will be called in the future?

+}