jdev - 2022-01-19

I've been working on server code for quite a few years now but never came up with a nice way to test things manually on the XMPP level. I keep typing stuff into an XML console and looking at results. I guess others have less tedious solutions? <https://code.matthewwild.co.uk/clix/> maybe?

I use clix a lot for testing.

+ rlwrap for repeatability 😉

https://matthewwild.co.uk/projects/scansion/ is pretty good for making proper repeatable test cases

So I can easily build more or less arbitrary stanzas using clix?

`clix raw` is more or less an xml console, so yeah

(We're fine with proper tests, thanks. Just my manual testing seems like it should work in a less meh way.)

it also lets you use prosodys stanza building api

Ah yes that sounds nicer than XML.

With some shortcuts like `m.chat"me@jabber.org":body"Hello"`

Not much in the way of documentation I'm afraid, but peek at https://code.matthewwild.co.uk/clix/file/tip/clix/raw.lua#l54

Pretty much what I was looking for, thanks! I'll see whether I can get it to build then 🙂

Holger, FWIW, Smack has a REPL

but I thin Clix is also a good solution

flow, do you use it in place of an XML console for testing things manually?

Holger, I use it to test things manually, but I never used it to send "raw" XML. It should be possible to do so, but the API (which in the case of an REPL becomes the CLI) could be improved

Holger: Not sure quite what you're asking, but we have an entire testing framework that can run up multiple servers and clients in a single process against an in-process virtual network that we can control as we wish and test interactions.

Kev, like scansion?

Kev, this sounds more like it's used for automated tests though? We do have something similar. What I need is just something for playing around with things _manually_.

Zash: I don't know scansion, so can't comment.

Holger: Ah. We tend to use Sluift for such stuff (Lua XMPP scripting stuff based on Swiften), depending what we're trying to do.

Ah, Sluift! I hadn't thought of that.

I don't have any reason to suspect it to be better than clix, though.