On Sat, Oct 7, 2017 at 9:08 PM, Jed Brown <j...@jedbrown.org> wrote: > Matthew Knepley <knep...@gmail.com> writes: > > > On Sat, Oct 7, 2017 at 6:26 AM, Barry Smith <bsm...@mcs.anl.gov> wrote: > > > >> > >> We'll be preparing another release in the next couple of months. It > >> would be nice to transition more examples to the new test harness. > >> > >> How can we organize this? My original plan was to try to do a > >> test/tutorial directory at a time in a branch and move them through > next. > >> Can we start to do this or is there still something missing in the test > >> harness? > > > > > > I want one more thing in the test harness, the ability to specify the > > number of procs on the fly. I tried to do this myself, but > > screwed it up. Can someone do it correctly? > > Test output very often changes when you change the number of processes > so the diff tests would often fail. What about just printing the exact > command that would be run? Then you can change number of processes or > other options without needing extra steps. >
This seems masochistic. I want to run a test with a different number of processes. So my best option is print out the options, cut & paste that soewhere, alter it to what I want, and run? Why would we have EXTRA_OPTIONS? Matt -- What most experimenters take for granted before they begin their experiments is infinitely more interesting than any results to which their experiments lead. -- Norbert Wiener https://www.cse.buffalo.edu/~knepley/ <http://www.caam.rice.edu/~mk51/>
