[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.