[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-10266?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14743873#comment-14743873
]
Benedict commented on CASSANDRA-10266:
--------------------------------------
bq. rewriting each of the methods in the test class to verify their output.
For something so critical this wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing, so long as
they are implemented orthogonally (and we can of course implement it as
inefficiently as we like). However there's no need to go that far; the
randomiser can work backwards, generating the expected output at the same time
as the input.
bq. not too difficult to exhaustively unit test.
That's why I ask "Are you confident that all possible combinations are
explored?" - this code is not so simple that I can tell if this is the case by
inspection, and any future changes to this code only make that harder to
guarantee. However if you're comfortable this is future proof and covers all
combinations, I'll try to convince myself as well.
> Introduce direct unit test coverage for Rows
> --------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-10266
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-10266
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Core
> Reporter: Benedict
> Assignee: Blake Eggleston
> Fix For: 3.0.0 rc1
>
>
> As with much of the codebase, we have no direct unit test coverage for
> {{Rows}}, and we should remedy this given how central it is to behaviour.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
