On 28/11/2014 09:00, Lukáš Doktor wrote:
> The benefit is, that on complex trees you'd not need to check all hooks,
> only the ones which applies for given test. The cons against your idea
> (if I understood it correctly) is, that your version would remove
> non-suitable variants during multiplexation, my version would execute
> the test up to the point where it gets to the params.get(trouble_maker)
> call (where it would generate the TestNAError).
> 
> So correct me if I'm wrong, but my impression is that for bigger trees
> with lots of irrelevant hooks your variant can be actually slower. For
> small trees without variants, they should be probably the same speed and
> for big trees with relevant hooks yours should be faster (and generates
> smaller report as it'd skip irrelevant tests).

I think we should avoid hooks as much as possible.  If done right, the
BDD processing should be ridiculously cheap, on the order of O(tree size).

But I am not sure how you'd use the hooks, so maybe I'm misunderstanding.

If you want to play with BDDs, I placed a small implementation here:
https://gist.github.com/bonzini/7942680bf9818938a259

The testcases, especially testComplexApply, will teach you how to use
it.  The main missing thing is a topological sort, which I will add when
I have some time.

Paolo

_______________________________________________
Virt-test-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/virt-test-devel

Reply via email to