On 2015/05/13 07:43:03, dougc wrote:
[...] Yes this sounds good and improved testing performance. Note the
test is
still
slow - more testing has been added. The test takes around 5 seconds here.
If
you
can give me a realistic time then testing can be scaled to fit? [...]
5 seconds are roughly 2 orders of magnitude to big: If every test we run
during
"make -j32 qc" took that long, it would roughly take 3.5 hours. So the rule
of
thumb is that a unit test should take a few dozen ms at most. Of course
there is
a tension between good test coverage and testing time, but more exhaustive
tests
should be split off into something separate (we discussed this several times
already, but I'm not sure what the current state of this is).
What you could do for unit testing is: Generate some sane fixed number (e.g.
1000) of pseudo-random inputs to the function you want to test and check
only
those, probably for various "interesting" range combinations. This is e.g.
the
idea behind Haskell's QuickCheck
(https://hackage.haskell.org/package/QuickCheck), and there are some C++
ports
of this which might be worth considering, this kind of testing problem
comes up
again and again.
https://codereview.chromium.org/1121573004/
--
--
v8-dev mailing list
v8-dev@googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "v8-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to v8-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
