On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 8:18 AM David Szent-Györgyi <[email protected]> wrote:
For data that is generated by hand or by plugins that are not centrally > controlled, and for tests that are difficult to write, would the > thoroughness of property-based testing be relevant? I wrote about that > <https://groups.google.com/g/leo-editor/c/o2W9LSqZcLE/m/Nz2CvjuqBAAJ> > some time back. Let me give a more direct answer to your question. The ekr-unit-test branch does not, by itself, make Leo more or less buggy. In future, however, the new unit testing framework will make it easier to add new unit tests. Imo, there is no urgent need for more tests anywhere. The tests for @shadow seem to cover all the important cases that arise in the update algorithm. It is, however, necessary to convince oneself that the new tests are equivalent to the old. This I have done to my own satisfaction. I could be wrong, but weak unit tests don't change the code being tested. The new test frame does highlight the lack of *any* unit tests for Leo's gui code. I am not inclined to add such tests. Using Leo on a daily basis seems sufficient, but the ongoing Qt6 bugs are troubling. Just a few minutes ago another long-standing bug appeared. See #2169 <https://github.com/leo-editor/leo-editor/issues/2169>. I'll fix this into devel, then merge devel into ekr-unit-tests. I'm not sure a new unit test is warranted :-) In short, the ekr-unit-test branch is a huge simplification of Leo's code, but I do not plan to do much more than fix bugs as they arise. But for the first time *other* devs (hint hint) may find Leo's unit testing framework pleasant to use. All contributions gratefully accepted! Edward -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leo-editor/CAMF8tS05bsuatbFxS3SU0aLrhEPCHdJNMpauib2jSjk4dNtGfg%40mail.gmail.com.
