[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [ProgSoc] Programming! Code!



Thanks for your comments Raz. Bed time, so just briefly:

On Thursday 19 October 2006 03:32, Roland Turner wrote:
> What is ordinarily of interest with coverage testing is how
> many of the possible execution _paths_ are in fact tested.

Doesn't that sort of suppose an implementation..? What happened to 'test 
first'?

I kind of like the idea of 'unit tests' as 'fitness tests' (albeit 
(necessarily) 'lossy' and 'incomplete' ones).

You can just 'grow' the 'fitness tests' as you discover and resolve 
problems, and they become regression tests of sorts. (i.e. they can 
function to ensure that you don't reintroduce a bug).

That's where I see the value in having the capacity to easily test for 
foo(7,12) == 19 and foo(2275,17) == 2292. There's always a friggin' 
special case, or some circumstance your type system wasn't designed to 
constrain... perhaps now foo(2275,17) must equal 42, so you add 
the 'failing test' (as 'documentation' and/or 'a todo list' of sorts). 







-
You are subscribed to the progsoc mailing list. To unsubscribe, send a
message containing "unsubscribe" to progsoc-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
If you are having trouble, ask owner-progsoc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx for help.