On Fri, 2003-07-25 at 11:43, James Owen wrote: > As one who has used JUnit to test rules in a production environment: > Yes, you can write JUnit classes for testing purposes to test the rules. > However, as the number of rules and the number of variable increase the > number of test cases rise dramatically. Geometrically to be more > specific. Or is that exponentially? Either way, it's a TON of test > cases.
Yes, but I'm going at it the other way around, using Jess rules to organize/apply test cases to Java code, not using Java test cases to test a rule base. Arguably the same thing in the long run but it still seems different somehow. Think of inspection gauges in musket manufacturing. There was a rules base (the inspector), a box of unorganized test cases (box of inspection gauges), and a stream of implementations (musket parts) that might or might not comply with their specification. They never tried to build gauges to test every possible dimension; just "critical dimensions", intelligently selected, relying on inspectors "common sense" for everything else. If it was feasible to build life-critical systems that way (things that can literally blow up in your face), seems like we (software) might give it a shot too. -------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, send the words 'unsubscribe jess-users [EMAIL PROTECTED]' in the BODY of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED], NOT to the list (use your own address!) List problems? Notify [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------