30 Apr 23:08
Re: QuickCheck properties for IntSet
Don Stewart <dons <at> galois.com>
2008-04-30 21:08:36 GMT
2008-04-30 21:08:36 GMT
igloo: > On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 01:35:45PM -0700, David Benbennick wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 10:34 AM, Ian Lynagh <igloo <at> earth.li> wrote: > > > I believe that a much smaller number of carefully chosen unit tests could test the library just as > > > well > > > > I think that if you remove any of the properties from my patch, I can > > break the implementation of IntSet in such a way that it still passes > > all the tests. > > I don't mean that any of your QC tests were redundant, what I mean is > that QC runs your tests with redundant values. > > > Anyway, the new QuickCheck properties are just > > comments, so they don't have any affect on the test suite. > > I don't think there is much benefit in having the tests if we aren't > going to run them. People making changes to the library will probably > forget to check that they pass (or not know that they exist), and the > tests will probably bitrot due to changes in other libraries etc. So I don't know what is being decided here? No QuickCheck properties for the containers library because Ian doesn't believe in them? Or ..? -- Don
RSS Feed