[PD] regression testing WAS Re: [psql] object hand-holding

IOhannes m zmoelnig zmoelnig at iem.at
Sun Dec 23 12:53:18 CET 2007

Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Dec 2007, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
>> - keep the tests as simple as possible, but not simpler
>> one should be able to write a test fairly easily; i think shortcuts are
>> most likely not needed most of the times (e.g. iirc, matju introduced
>> several shortcuts in his unity-test frameworks to test for
>> mathematically important concepts (like assosiativity of operations); i
>> think it is way simpler to just program 3 tests manually instead)
> I think that the tests for associativity are not going to be so useful, 
> but they're still a good practice in some way. However, my goal for 
> PureUnity was not just to make regression tests, but also invent a bunch 
> of superclasses for all the Pd builtins (and some externals) in order to 
> make a categorisation of objects that makes sense from the point of view 
> of how you use the objects: e.g. [timer] and [realtime] would be in the 
> same category not because they deal with time, but because the left bang 
> starts and the right bang stops and outputs a float.
>> - allow fail-tests which have to return FAIL-state in order to success
> How do you know that a method has failed properly?

because it returns the expected FAIL-state.

the problem is the same as "how do you know that a method has succeeded 

you need a-priori knowledge about the expected return state of the test.
i usually do this by a discrimination based on the test-name. (prefixing 
e.g. "fail_blabla" will only success if it returns the state "FAIL" 
immediately or after a "WAIT".


More information about the Pd-list mailing list