po 9. 12. 2019 v 19:15 odesÃlatel Karl O. Pinc <k...@meme.com> napsal:
> Hi Pavel, > > I've had some thoughts about the regression tests. > > It wouldn't hurt to move them to right after the > scale() tests in numeric.sql. > > I believe your tests are covering all the code paths > but it is not clear just what test does what. > I don't see a lot of comments in the tests so I don't > know that it'd be appropriate to put them in to > describe just what's tested. But in any case it > could be nice to choose values where it is at least > sort of apparent what part of the codebase is tested. > > FWIW, although the code paths are covered, the possible > data permutations are not. E.g. I don't see a case > where scale > 0 and the NDIGITS of the last digit is full. > > There are also some tests (the 0 and 0.00 tests) that duplicates > the execution path. In the 0 case I don't see a problem > but as a rule there's not a lot of point. Better test > values would (mostly) eliminate these. > > So, my thoughts run along these lines: > > select minscale(numeric 'NaN') is NULL; -- should be true > select minscale(NULL::numeric) is NULL; -- should be true > select minscale(0); -- no digits > select minscale(0.00); -- no digits again > select minscale(1.0); -- no scale > select minscale(1.1); -- scale 1 > select minscale(1.12); -- scale 2 > select minscale(1.123); -- scale 3 > select minscale(1.1234); -- scale 4, filled digit > select minscale(1.12345); -- scale 5, 2 NDIGITS > select minscale(1.1000); -- 1 pos in NDIGITS > select minscale(1.1200); -- 2 pos in NDIGITS > select minscale(1.1230); -- 3 pos in NDIGITS > select minscale(1.1234); -- all pos in NDIGITS > select minscale(1.12345000); -- 2 NDIGITS > select minscale(1.123400000000); -- strip() required/done > select minscale(12345.123456789012345); -- "big" number > select minscale(-12345.12345); -- negative number > select minscale(1e100); -- very big number > select minscale(1e100::numeric + 0.1); -- big number with scale > > I don't know why you chose some of your values so if there's > something you were testing for that the above does not cover > please include it. > > some values was proposed in discussion, others are from tests of scale function. I used proposed tests by you. Regards Pavel > So, a combination of white and black box testing. Having written > it out it seems like a lot of testing for such a simple function. > On the other hand I don't see a lot of cost in having all > these tests. Opinions welcome. > > Regards, > > Karl <k...@meme.com> > Free Software: "You don't pay back, you pay forward." > -- Robert A. Heinlein >
