Re: [swift-dev] Purpose of validation-test/Reflection/reflect_*.swift

[Dave Abrahams via swift-dev]

on Wed Oct 26 2016, Slava Pestov  wrote:

> The tests are there to ensure the reflection output doesn’t
> accidentally break or change. 

Unless you have reason to think it will break or change *only* for some
particular stdlib types, and that reflecting the implementation details
of those types is somehow an important use-case, you can easily verify
that just as well by using some types that *aren't* in the standard
library.

> However if you’re updating the layout of those types you need to
> update the tests.
>
> Slava
>
>> On Oct 26, 2016, at 5:41 PM, Michael Gottesman via swift-dev 
>>  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> On Oct 26, 2016, at 5:29 PM, Alexis via swift-dev  > wrote:
>>> 
>>> I’m not clear on what the reflection tests are attempting to
>>> actually verify. Just that we don’t change the internal layout of
>>> these types accidentally? We’re churning up the layouts of a lot of
>>> the collections to get things all set up for ABI stability, which
>>> means mechanically updating these tests to expect “whatever output
>>> we now happen to output”.
>>> 
>>> In Dave’s initial eager bridging stuff he left a comment indicating
>>> that these are incorrectly relying on implementation
>>> details. Without any context, I’m inclined to agree. The fact that
>>> somewhere deep in the guts of String there lives an enum doesn’t
>>> seem important to verify. (how big it is, and how many extra
>>> inhabitants it has, does seem worth verifying longterm).
>> 
>> I think this was originally done by Dave Farler.
>> 
>> Michael
>> 
>>> ___
>>> swift-dev mailing list
>>> swift-dev@swift.org 
>>> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-dev
>> 
>> ___
>> swift-dev mailing list
>> swift-dev@swift.org
>> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-dev
>
> ___
> swift-dev mailing list
> swift-dev@swift.org
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-dev
>

-- 
-Dave

___
swift-dev mailing list
swift-dev@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-dev

Re: [swift-dev] Purpose of validation-test/Reflection/reflect_*.swift

[Slava Pestov via swift-dev]

The tests are there to ensure the reflection output doesn’t accidentally break 
or change. However if you’re updating the layout of those types you need to 
update the tests.

Slava

> On Oct 26, 2016, at 5:41 PM, Michael Gottesman via swift-dev 
>  wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Oct 26, 2016, at 5:29 PM, Alexis via swift-dev > > wrote:
>> 
>> I’m not clear on what the reflection tests are attempting to actually 
>> verify. Just that we don’t change the internal layout of these types 
>> accidentally? We’re churning up the layouts of a lot of the collections to 
>> get things all set up for ABI stability, which means mechanically updating 
>> these tests to expect “whatever output we now happen to output”.
>> 
>> In Dave’s initial eager bridging stuff he left a comment indicating that 
>> these are incorrectly relying on implementation details. Without any 
>> context, I’m inclined to agree. The fact that somewhere deep in the guts of 
>> String there lives an enum doesn’t seem important to verify. (how big it is, 
>> and how many extra inhabitants it has, does seem worth verifying longterm).
> 
> I think this was originally done by Dave Farler.
> 
> Michael
> 
>> ___
>> swift-dev mailing list
>> swift-dev@swift.org 
>> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-dev
> 
> ___
> swift-dev mailing list
> swift-dev@swift.org
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-dev

___
swift-dev mailing list
swift-dev@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-dev

Re: [swift-dev] Purpose of validation-test/Reflection/reflect_*.swift

[Michael Gottesman via swift-dev]

> On Oct 26, 2016, at 5:29 PM, Alexis via swift-dev  wrote:
> 
> I’m not clear on what the reflection tests are attempting to actually verify. 
> Just that we don’t change the internal layout of these types accidentally? 
> We’re churning up the layouts of a lot of the collections to get things all 
> set up for ABI stability, which means mechanically updating these tests to 
> expect “whatever output we now happen to output”.
> 
> In Dave’s initial eager bridging stuff he left a comment indicating that 
> these are incorrectly relying on implementation details. Without any context, 
> I’m inclined to agree. The fact that somewhere deep in the guts of String 
> there lives an enum doesn’t seem important to verify. (how big it is, and how 
> many extra inhabitants it has, does seem worth verifying longterm).

I think this was originally done by Dave Farler.

Michael

> ___
> swift-dev mailing list
> swift-dev@swift.org
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-dev

___
swift-dev mailing list
swift-dev@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-dev

[swift-dev] Purpose of validation-test/Reflection/reflect_*.swift

[Alexis via swift-dev]

I’m not clear on what the reflection tests are attempting to actually verify. 
Just that we don’t change the internal layout of these types accidentally? 
We’re churning up the layouts of a lot of the collections to get things all set 
up for ABI stability, which means mechanically updating these tests to expect 
“whatever output we now happen to output”.

In Dave’s initial eager bridging stuff he left a comment indicating that these 
are incorrectly relying on implementation details. Without any context, I’m 
inclined to agree. The fact that somewhere deep in the guts of String there 
lives an enum doesn’t seem important to verify. (how big it is, and how many 
extra inhabitants it has, does seem worth verifying longterm).___
swift-dev mailing list
swift-dev@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-dev