My point is that we don't really need patch. Just keep
> tests/output
>/ex1.out
>/ex1-1.diff
>/ex1-2.diff
Compute the diff between the output and ex1.out if it is not null diff with
/ex1-1.diff etc until it finds match. Not earth shattering.
I defini
On 5/3/19 3:13 PM, Smith, Barry F. wrote:
On May 3, 2019, at 3:57 PM, Scott Kruger wrote:
Sticking to the immediate issues and ignoring the other meta issues...
I think what you want could possibly be used to simplify the test harness if we
push things down to the petscdiff level. If
> On May 3, 2019, at 3:57 PM, Scott Kruger wrote:
>
>
>
> Sticking to the immediate issues and ignoring the other meta issues...
>
> I think what you want could possibly be used to simplify the test harness if
> we push things down to the petscdiff level. If we
> have petscdiff detect the
Sticking to the immediate issues and ignoring the other meta issues...
I think what you want could possibly be used to simplify the test
harness if we push things down to the petscdiff level. If we
have petscdiff detect the diff then it will automatically apply
the patches. This would elim
Hapla Vaclav via petsc-dev writes:
> I'm not sure you about this nomenclature. Let me take DMPlexInterpolate as an
> example:
> So (1) comparing the actual view of the interpolated mesh to the snapshot
> stored in the output file would be an integration test, whereas (2) calling a
> set of DMP
On 3 May 2019, at 06:21, Karl Rupp via petsc-dev
mailto:petsc-dev@mcs.anl.gov>> wrote:
Hi,
Scott and PETSc folks,
Using alt files for testing is painful. Whenever you add, for example, a
new variable to be output in a viewer it changes the output files and you need
to regenerate the
A recent post comparing performance of some of those unit testing frameworks.
http://www.duskborn.com/posts/utest-h-performance/
My point about integration tests is that if we had more unit tests, the
integration tests could have less reliance on long-form convergence
logs, thus reducing the nu
Most packages that have good coverage with unit tests use a unit test system
to manage the unit test code. I was actually surprised how many there are for C
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unit_testing_frameworks#C. But
selecting evaluating and implementing a unit test environment
Using alt files for testing is painful. Whenever you add, for example, a
new variable to be output in a viewer it changes the output files and you need
to regenerate the alt files for all the test configurations. Even though the
run behavior of the code hasn't changed.
I'm look
Karl Rupp via petsc-dev writes:
> Hi,
>
>> Scott and PETSc folks,
>>
>> Using alt files for testing is painful. Whenever you add, for example,
>> a new variable to be output in a viewer it changes the output files and you
>> need to regenerate the alt files for all the test configura
Hi,
Scott and PETSc folks,
Using alt files for testing is painful. Whenever you add, for example, a
new variable to be output in a viewer it changes the output files and you need
to regenerate the alt files for all the test configurations. Even though the
run behavior of the code h
Scott and PETSc folks,
Using alt files for testing is painful. Whenever you add, for example, a
new variable to be output in a viewer it changes the output files and you need
to regenerate the alt files for all the test configurations. Even though the
run behavior of the code hasn't c
12 matches
Mail list logo
