- Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-dev] SUnit improvements need review and feedback

by stepharo

> > 2016-09-03 9:22 GMT+02:00 stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr > <mailto:stepharo@free.fr>>: > > Denis > > can we also have > > assert: aNumber withPrecision: precision equals: otherNumber > > self > assert: (aNumber round: precision) > equals: otherNumber > > assert: aNumber closeTo: otherNumber > > assert: aNumber withPrecision: self defaultPrecision equals: otherNumber > > defaultPrecision > ^ 2 > > > We could add it but as different issue. > > Also I really want move away from assertions to should expressions. It > is much nicer to write things like this (which available in StateSpecs): > > 10.1234 should equal: 10.12 within: 0.01 "success" > 10.1234 should equal: 10.12 within: 0.001 "failure" > > Also I has idea that float assertions should always use default > precision (like 0.00000000001) without special message. > > (80.85 * 100) should equal: 8085 > > It will fail now but I want it always succeed in such cases. Because > in most cases users don't care about this. And when it has real value > users will specify concrete precision Just one step at a time please. Let us make SUnit with some simple extension.

Sept. 4, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] SUnit improvements need review and feedback

by stepharo

Nicolas I like your ideas can you propose (code) something? Stef Le 3/9/16 Ã 09:48, Nicolas Cellier a Ã©crit : > For floating points it would be good to also have something related to > unit of least precision like I think it exists in google tests: > > assert: aFloat isWithin: anInteger ulpFrom: anotherFloat > ^(aFloat - anotherFloat) abs <= (anotherFloat ulp max: aFloat ulp) > > It's testing if the result are the same with a tolerance on least > significant bits. > (anotherFloat ulp max: aFloat ulp) is not really necessary, it's only > for making the comparison symmetric. > indeed, 2 and 2 predecessor do not have the same exponent, so do not > have the same ulp. > If we don't have symmetry, then > self assert: 2.0 predecessor predecessor isWithin: 1 ulpFrom: 2.0. > might differ from: > self assert: 2.0 isWithin: 1 ulpFrom: 2.0 predecessor predecessor . > > Note that the this message cannot be used to test for zero result > (because 0.0 ulp is the smallest denormal). > For example: > self assert: 2.0 - 2.0 predecessor isWithin: 4 ulpFrom: 0.0. > would anwer false, but it makes no sense! > One should write > self assert: 2.0 isWithin: 4 ulpFrom: 2.0 predecessor. > > 2016-09-03 9:22 GMT+02:00 stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr > <mailto:stepharo@free.fr>>: > > Denis > > can we also have > > assert: aNumber withPrecision: precision equals: otherNumber > > self > assert: (aNumber round: precision) > equals: otherNumber > > assert: aNumber closeTo: otherNumber > > assert: aNumber withPrecision: self defaultPrecision equals: otherNumber > > defaultPrecision > ^ 2 > > > > Le 31/8/16 Ã 14:10, Denis Kudriashov a Ã©crit : >> Hi. >> >> I am working on SUnit improvements. I open issue 19015 >> <https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/19015/Tests-should-never-hang-and-leave-f…>. >> Slice is inbox which waits your review and feedback. >> I was trying to address three problems: >> >> *1) Tests should never hang. They should be always executed >> within time limit.* >> I give them 10 minutes for now to not change existing behaviour >> of tests. At next step it should be really reduced to ~100 >> milliseconds (?). >> Any TestCase could redefine time limit by method #defaultTimeLimit. >> Or it could be specified directly in test code by >> self timeLimit: 10 seconds >> (could be changed at any time of test execution). > > would be good >> >> To implement this logic special watch dog process is running for >> given test suite to control execution time of tests. It is single >> process for full test suite. >> >> *2) When test completes all forked processes should be terminated.*** >> >> If your tested code produced zombie processes SUnit will take >> care about destroying all such garbage. >> (it not means that you don't need to clean table in #tearDown but >> any code could be broken and running tests should not produce >> dirty system). > Yes!!! > >> *3) Any failures inside forked processes should not spawn >> debugger while running tests.* >> Only when we debug tests we need debugger on forked failed processes. >> During normal run SUnit should prevent such "background >> debuggers" and mark such tests as failed. >> > Definitevely. Now when we execute tests from the testRunner and > nautilus we should get the debugger, right? > > >> To implement this behaviour SUnit will handle errors from forked >> processes by suspending them and collecting them in special >> collection. >> I introduce TestFailedByForkedProcess error to signal these kind >> of problems at the end of tests. This error is resumable and >> resume will opens debuggers of suspended failures (in fact it >> will resume suspended processes). >> So to debug background failures you will need extra Proceed >> action on debugger when TestFailedByForkedProcess is signalled. >> But in normal run such tests will be just failed by >> TestFailedByForkedProcess error. > We should really write a little doc so that I can add it to the > Sunit Chapter. > > > >> >> *Now details on how it is done:* >> >> I introduce special process specific variable >> CurrentExecutionEnvironment. It is not installed by default and >> as default value it returns DefaultExecutionEnvironment instance. >> This variable is inheritable. If your install concrete >> environment into process it will be installed to any child process. >> >> So value of variable is instance of ExecutionEnvironment >> subclasses and you can install it by: >> >> anYourExecutionEnvironment beActiveDuring: aBlock >> >> >> When block completes previous environment is restored. >> For default environment there is class side method: >> >> DefaultExecutionEnvironment beActiveDuring: aBlock >> >> >> And to reset current environment to default: >> >> DefaultExecutionEnvironment beActive. >> >> >> SUnit introduces TestExecutionEnvironment which implements all >> described behaviour for time limits and forked processes. >> To activate environment there is new method #runCaseManaged. And >> submitted slice uses it instead of simple runCase. >> >> TestCase>>runCaseManaged >> CurrentExecutionEnvironment runTestCase: self >> >> >> DefaultExecutionEnvironment will install new >> TestExecutionEnvironment and delegate processing to it. And if >> TestExecutionEnvironment is already active it will just process >> new test case. >> >> Now monkey has problem in checking slice (annoying timeout for >> loading). >> So I can't see real system impact. But it should not stop you >> from review :)) >> I think it is very important features for all our tests. And >> environment idea will lead to very interesting future. > > Indeed! >> >> Best regards, >> Denis > >

Sept. 4, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] About file printOn: method

by stepharo

It is raining and I will do it :) stef Le 4/9/16 Ã 02:38, monty a Ã©crit : > +1 > >> Sent: Saturday, September 03, 2016 at 10:39 AM >> From: stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr> >> To: "Pharo Development List" <pharo-dev(a)lists.pharo.org> >> Subject: [Pharo-dev] About file printOn: method >> >> Hi >> >> >> I will implement the following because this is too annoying. >> >> currently >> >> 'tmp/foo.txt' asFileReference >> > >> File @ tmp/foo.txt >> >> and it would be much much better to get back >> 'tmp/foo.txt' asFileReference >> >> So that we can get >> { 'tmp/foo.txt' asFileReference } >> > { 'tmp/foo.txt' asFileReference } >> >> and not >> "an Array(File @ tmp/foo.txt)" >> >> >> In addition we should turn the current printOn: method into a >> displayString method so that >> a list of fileReference can be well display with File @ tmp/foo.txt for >> example >> >> >> https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/18956 >> >> >> >

Sept. 4, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] could we discuss 19006

by stepharo

thanks. I had problems to see the code when merging. I will integrate it today if the system lets me doing it :). Le 4/9/16 Ã 02:19, monty a Ã©crit : > It doesn't add any new streams or other classes besides a test case. AbstractBinaryStream was already there. > > It just adds #sync to the FileSysteam API and legacy file streams, recategorizes many stream methods to make them more consistent, fixes #flush to fail when the primitive does (the correct behavior-read the comment!), and adds tests for WriteStream and LimitedWriteStream. > > The #sync addition on Unix uses ffsync(), while #flush uses fflush(). Why is #sync needed if we have #flush? From `man fflush`: > >> Note that fflush() flushes only the user-space buffers provided by the >> C library. To ensure that the data is physically stored on disk the >> kernel buffers must be flushed too, for example, with sync(2) or >> fsync(2). > (but on Windows they're implemented identically) > >> Sent: Saturday, September 03, 2016 at 3:34 PM >> From: stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr> >> To: "Pharo Development List" <pharo-dev(a)lists.pharo.org> >> Subject: [Pharo-dev] could we discuss 19006 >> >> Hi guys >> >> The change 19006 is adding a lot of streams AbstractBinaryStream and I >> do not really get the vision. >> >> Note that I'm not against. I just want to understand. >> >> Do we add these and remove some old ones? >> >> What is sync? >> >> Ideally I would like to throw away all the streams and use xtreams instead. >> >> So thanks for your time explaining us the idea. >> >> >> Stef >> >> >> >> >> >

Sept. 4, 2016

streamlining creation of gtInspector extensions

by Ben Coman

Just a passing thought (that I'm sorry I don't have time to explore myself right now) ... I wonder if GT devs might experiment with streamlining discover-ability of existing and creation of new extensions by being able to right-click the tabs to get a menu.... * Show Definition - which opens a browser on the right code * Create Custom Extension - which opens a dialog to create a new package "MyGTExtensions" and/or select an existing package, specify an identifier and choose a template that is created and Browser opened. The might help facilitate creating the extensions while in the "flow" of developing. At the moment I need to break context to go searching for gtInspectorXX: examples to use as a template, take time understanding each to choose which is applicable (repetitively each time I want to create an extension since they don't "stick" in my head). At times I feel a tension between taking the time to create an extension and staying in the "flow" and I think such a facility would reduce this friction. cheers -ben

Sept. 4, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] About file printOn: method

by monty

+1 > Sent: Saturday, September 03, 2016 at 10:39 AM > From: stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr> > To: "Pharo Development List" <pharo-dev(a)lists.pharo.org> > Subject: [Pharo-dev] About file printOn: method > > Hi > > > I will implement the following because this is too annoying. > > currently > > 'tmp/foo.txt' asFileReference > > > File @ tmp/foo.txt > > and it would be much much better to get back > 'tmp/foo.txt' asFileReference > > So that we can get > { 'tmp/foo.txt' asFileReference } > > { 'tmp/foo.txt' asFileReference } > > and not > "an Array(File @ tmp/foo.txt)" > > > In addition we should turn the current printOn: method into a > displayString method so that > a list of fileReference can be well display with File @ tmp/foo.txt for > example > > > https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/18956 > > >

Sept. 4, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] could we discuss 19006

by monty

It doesn't add any new streams or other classes besides a test case. AbstractBinaryStream was already there. It just adds #sync to the FileSysteam API and legacy file streams, recategorizes many stream methods to make them more consistent, fixes #flush to fail when the primitive does (the correct behavior-read the comment!), and adds tests for WriteStream and LimitedWriteStream. The #sync addition on Unix uses ffsync(), while #flush uses fflush(). Why is #sync needed if we have #flush? From `man fflush`: > Note that fflush() flushes only the user-space buffers provided by the > C library. To ensure that the data is physically stored on disk the > kernel buffers must be flushed too, for example, with sync(2) or > fsync(2). (but on Windows they're implemented identically) > Sent: Saturday, September 03, 2016 at 3:34 PM > From: stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr> > To: "Pharo Development List" <pharo-dev(a)lists.pharo.org> > Subject: [Pharo-dev] could we discuss 19006 > > Hi guys > > The change 19006 is adding a lot of streams AbstractBinaryStream and I > do not really get the vision. > > Note that I'm not against. I just want to understand. > > Do we add these and remove some old ones? > > What is sync? > > Ideally I would like to throw away all the streams and use xtreams instead. > > So thanks for your time explaining us the idea. > > > Stef > > > > >

Sept. 4, 2016

Re: [Pharo-dev] SUnit improvements need review and feedback

by Denis Kudriashov

2016-09-03 19:11 GMT+02:00 Paul DeBruicker <pdebruic(a)gmail.com>: > Oh wait I see in the first message in this thread you have > > self timeLimit: 10 seconds > yes

Sept. 3, 2016

Message browser strange new behavior

by stepharo

Hi Often I look at senders and I modify them directly in the message browser and I do not one by one. Now when I recompile a method I get a new one and I lose the next one. Am I the only one to have this behavior. It is highly disrputing. Stef

Sept. 3, 2016

pillar ast & tokens

by Tudor Girba

Hi, I am reviewing the Pillar PetitParser. Nice work! I would like to use the AST that comes out of it for creating a highlighter. To this end, I would need the range in the original source of an AST node. For example, to highlight a script, I would need to know where it starts and where it ends. This information is available in the parser, but I noticed that the AST does not preserve the original tokens (or at least the source range). Is there any reason for it? If no, is there are any plan to add these tokens to the AST? Cheers, Doru -- www.tudorgirba.com www.feenk.com "Some battles are better lost than fought."

Sept. 3, 2016