[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-1539?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15710704#comment-15710704
]
Daniel Kuppitz commented on TINKERPOP-1539:
-------------------------------------------
[~okram] Do you prefer to use the good old toy graphs for these tests or should
we create custom graphs (in the worst case one per test)? I would prefer if we
don't limit ourselves to the toy graphs (it's actually just the GD graph when
we talk about complex queries). Every now and then I end up writing real
complex queries on the mailing list; these queries require graphs with certain
structures that we mostly won't find in our toy graphs.
> Create a ComplexTraversalTest with crazy nested gnarly traversals.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: TINKERPOP-1539
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-1539
> Project: TinkerPop
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: process, test-suite
> Affects Versions: 3.2.3
> Reporter: Marko A. Rodriguez
> Assignee: Daniel Kuppitz
>
> Our {{ProcessSuite}} has numerous tests verifying the semantics of the
> various steps. Unfortunately, these tests are on simple traversals focused on
> exposing the step in question in isolation.
> It would be good to add {{ComplexTraversalTest}} to the {{ProcessSuite}}
> which has traversals over the Grateful Dead graph (for complexity reasons)
> doing:
> 1. Numerous nests.
> 2. Match/Select/Where complexities.
> 3. Global side-effect access and unrolling and injecting.
> 4. ... just a bunch of nasty stuff.
> This will give us much more confidence as we add more strategies and
> potentially, mess up our algebra which isn't exposed by the simple
> "flat'-traversals we current test with.
> [~dkuppitz] --- would you be interested in doing this?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
