RE: Calc unit tests
Hi Markus, >> I'm working on fixes for Calc functions (LEGACY.)CHITEST and CHISQ.TEST >> that came forward when Raal compared results between Calc and Excel. >> When compiling my changes I came across unit test functions in >> sc/qa/unit/ucalc_formula.cxx, as these failed because of my changes. >> They tested the current behaviour, not the ODFF1.2 specs. > So for now I suppose the best way forward is to just adapt the existing tests > to conform to your improved implementation. No problem, will do. That brings me to the next issue: ODFF1.2 interpretation and Excel interoperability. ODFF1.2 states for LEGACY.CHITEST that "For an empty element or an element of type Text or Boolean in A the element at the corresponding position of E is ignored, and vice versa.". This was not the case and I am fixing that. Excel ignores empty elements AND retains the value for the number of rows and columns of the ranges, i.e. a range of 3x3 and a range of 3x4 (same value plus an empty row somewhere) produce different results. I can't see any mathematical reason in retaining the number of rows and columns of the ranges in case of empty elements, but it very much simplifies the calculation and with my fix Calc reproduces Excel's behaviour. But what if ALL elements are empty? All ignored produces a Xi^2 of 1, i.e. a function result of 1. But Excel returns an error (#DIV/0!, even) and that I cannot explain or defend. IMHO Calc should return 1 or return IllegalArgumentError plus corresponding explanation in help/ODFF1.2 that the ranges must have at least 1 data pair (i.e. a change request to add a constraint to ODF1.2 for LEGACY.CHITEST). That way we block a useless use case and retain interoperability with Excel (even though the error type differs). I would like to hear your opinion in this, as it seems we have to choose between a mathematic approach/ODF1.2 and Excel's behaviour. (And Boolean is a type I cannot distinguish from numeric, so that part of ODFF1.2 I have to ignore.) Winfried ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: Calc unit tests
Hey Winfried, On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 2:02 PM, Winfried Donkers < w.donk...@dci-electronics.nl> wrote: > Hi Markus, > > > > I'm working on fixes for Calc functions (LEGACY.)CHITEST and CHISQ.TEST > that came forward when Raal compared results between Calc and Excel. > > When compiling my changes I came across unit test functions in > sc/qa/unit/ucalc_formula.cxx, as these failed because of my changes. They > tested the current behaviour, not the ODFF1.2 specs. > > I wonder if you have ideas about these tests now Raal has made test > documents for almost all Calc functions? Can they be deleted, at least the > CHITEST-test function, or do you intend to keep both unit tests (in which > case I shall fix that test too)? > We still plan to have some tests in ucalc_formula.cxx. They have the advantage of being more precise (they point directly to a failing statement) and are much faster to execute. However such a test should only be added in case of a fixed bug or a problem that is not easily covered in the formula tests. It is not unexpected that some of them are written against the implementation instead of the specification. The best solution is to adapt them while fixing the implementation. Actually I would consider them doing there job if they start to fail when you update the implementation. While a failing unit test normally means something broke you always need to evaluate the failure and assess whether it might not be an expected failure based on the new implementation. So for now I suppose the best way forward is to just adapt the existing tests to conform to your improved implementation. Regards, Markus > > > Winfried > > > ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Calc unit tests
Hi Markus, I'm working on fixes for Calc functions (LEGACY.)CHITEST and CHISQ.TEST that came forward when Raal compared results between Calc and Excel. When compiling my changes I came across unit test functions in sc/qa/unit/ucalc_formula.cxx, as these failed because of my changes. They tested the current behaviour, not the ODFF1.2 specs. I wonder if you have ideas about these tests now Raal has made test documents for almost all Calc functions? Can they be deleted, at least the CHITEST-test function, or do you intend to keep both unit tests (in which case I shall fix that test too)? Winfried ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice-qa] New way for non coders to help with calc unit tests
Le 30/09/11 22:37, Markus Mohrhard a écrit : Hi Markus, Thanks for the heads up and the work on preparing the ground and basics for what I hope will be a very useful addition to the unit testing of LibreOffice. Although I'm not much of a Calc user myself, I will have a look at what has been prepared and see if I can add anything useful. Thanks once again to everyone who worked on this. Alex ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
[Libreoffice-qa] New way for non coders to help with calc unit tests
Hello guys, I want to present you the new way you can write build-time unit tests for calc. * How are the tests organized?* The tests are located in sc/qa/unit and consists of filters-test.cxx and the files in sc/qa/unit/data. In the data directory there is one directory per supported file extensions (ods, xls, xlsx) and one directory contentCSV that only contains csv files. Please don't touch the other directories, they are for special tests) At the moment we have a for-named-ranges test, a database ranges test , a formatting test and a standard content test file. Additionally there is one file per directory for bugfix tests so that import bugs that are fixed once will not reoccur. If possible a new test case should be added to each of the three directories so that we test as much as possible for every filter. * What can we test?* We can test the content of a calc document directly after loading it. It is quite easy to test the content of cells, that means the formula in a cell, the result as a value and the formatted result as a string. It is even possible to test the result of cells that are part of conditional formatting. It gets more complicated for other stuff since I don't have any csv handler for that or it might need some code to test it. We can't test any dynamic changes in calc documents with this test ( there is ucalc for these cases). So for unit tests that try to emulate user input and/or changes that go beyond what is done during loading, can't be tested with this easy unit test. * How to write a new test?* It's quite easy to write a new unit test. The first step is to create a document that should be tested or add/extend an existing sheet in a document. The second step is to create for every sheet a csv file that contains the expected result, formula or string that the test document should contain. *How can I get the existing files?* Either you have the source code already than it is in sc/qa/unit or you can get the files from: http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/plain/sc/qa/unit/data I will create a wiki page for these information soon but feel free to ask me anything or make suggestions. I try to announce changes around this on the QA list. It would be amazing if some of the calc users would write or extend the existing tests. Even if you could provide just one or two test cases you would help very much ensure that our next release will contain less bugs and that calc becomes even more stable. Here are somethings, for instance, that could be tested or the test extended: - normal content - data pilot/pivot table - the functions document should be extended to all build-in functions ( testing special cases, normal behaviour, etc. ) - advanced functions like sorted content, autofilter, subtotals, scenarios, etc. - some of the import bugs fixed during the 3-4 release cycle I'm sure I missed a lot of important things and that is your big chance! Did you ever wanted to commit something to Libreoffice source code but you don't know how to code ? You don't have the time to get familiar with the code ? This is the perfect opportunity to get your first commit ;) You have a nasty bug that you don't want to see again ? Write a test file, add a csv file with the expected content and send it to the libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org list. I'm looking forward to all your great contributions that will help us to release a nice next version. Regards, Markus P.S. Links to all ods documents that we have at the moment: http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/plain/sc/qa/unit/data/ods/bug-fixes.ods http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/plain/sc/qa/unit/data/ods/database.ods http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/plain/sc/qa/unit/data/ods/formats.ods http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/plain/sc/qa/unit/data/ods/functions.ods http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/plain/sc/qa/unit/data/ods/named-ranges-global.ods http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/plain/sc/qa/unit/data/ods/universal-content.ods ___ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
