dan nessett <dness...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> I am investigating how to write a comprehensive parser regression test. What 
> I mean by this is something you wouldn't normally run frequently, but rather 
> something that we could use to get past the "known to fail" tests now 
> disabled. The problem is no one understands the parser well enough to have 
> confidence that if you fix one of these tests that you will not break 
> something else.

> So, I thought, how about using the guts of DumpHTML to create a comprehensive 
> parser regression test. The idea is to have two versions of phase3 + 
> extensions, one without the change you make to the parser to fix a 
> known-to-fail test (call this Base) and one with the change (call this 
> Current). Modify DumpHTML to first visit a page through Base, saving the HTML 
> then visit the same page through Current and compare the two results. Do this 
> for every page in the database. If there are no differences, the change in 
> Current works.
> [...]

I use a similar approach on a toolserver script in addition
to smaller tests: I saved several revisions of "interesting"
wiki pages and the respective output of the then-current
script version to the subversion repository. Before commit-
ting changes, I run a test whether the current script produ-
ces the same results. If the results are different, either a
bug needs to be fixed or the expected output be amended (in
the same commit).

Tim

P. S.: I find your dedication to QA very laudable; I think
       though that more people would read and embrace your
       thoughts if you would find a more concise way to put
       them across :-).


_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Reply via email to