On Oct 25, 2011, at 11:44 AM, F.J. Kraan wrote:
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 7:35 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner<h...@at.or.at
> wrote:
Ah, course, makes sense. The third item there, the IIR filters, it
should be not too hard to reproduce the exact same operation with
them
too. With the tests, each one is run in a new Pd instance, so
they're
always starting from scratch. Pd is then quit, and restarted for
the
next test.
But how do you want to create and check the test if the only
environment the test will produce proper results is the unattended
automatic run? If the test would fail, it would be hard to find out
why, as the manual run would always produce a different result.
I guess I don't quite follow what you mean here. I am thinking that
for a more elaborate test, the test patch would would run thru the IIR
filter a few times. Each iteration of the IIR filter test should
produce the same result.
This does remind me tho, the original load_every_help.py script would
load each help patch into the same instance of Pd, just continually
reusing it. That would trigger a couple hard-to-reproduce bugs that
basically only happened when loading every help patch in a certain
order. I was focused on getting a report on each help patch, so I
changed the script to make a new Pd instance per test. But Pd should
be able to load every help patch without crashing, so perhaps we need
a second test mode where the same Pd is reused again and again.
.hc
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"[W]e have invented the technology to eliminate scarcity, but we are
deliberately throwing it away to benefit those who profit from
scarcity." -John Gilmore
_______________________________________________
Pd-dev mailing list
Pd-dev@iem.at
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
