Jody Hagins wrote:
On Tue, 07 Jun 2005 13:29:30 +0200 Tobias Schwinger <tschwinger@neoscientists.org> wrote:
Ahh - you are talking about the test. Sorry, I missed the file extension:
Actually this is an "example/test hybrid" take a look at
libs/function_types/test/arity_and_type.cpp
This test is the output of an external code generator in the 'tools' directory and should be much more bullet proof (but this is a "real test" with no "example aspects", so I would not hyperlink it to the documentation).
OK, Thanks.
Taking a brief look at arity_and_type.cpp, it seems to be missing some stuff...
no tests for any_function
no tests for any of the tags with variadic in the name
The tests in the examples directory for those are not sufficient, and the perl script should be modified to add tests for the missing ones...
I agree - these should be added (there can't be enough tests, can there ?). Evaluating the sufficiency of tests, however, does AFAIK require an understanding of the implementation: Inside a system there are always certain laws that are assumed to be tautologies, such as adding 1 and 2 becomes 3. So there is no point in testing parts of an implementation that are directly based upon these laws, because there is no way to verify the result from within the system. Regards, Tobias