<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 2:30 PM, Robinson, Paul <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:paul.robinson@sony.com" target="_blank">paul.robinson@sony.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div><span>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:1.0in">What you are describing is what testing literature refers to as criteria<br>
for equivalence classes. There is some level of judgment to that, yes.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Yep yep, to be sure. I'm just generally trying to encourage the community behavior towards being both selective & thorough about testing.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><a name="m_-8643970301578982900_m_-6185676228577247249__MailEndCompose"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">I have noticed you doing this (not just in this review) and I am very appreciative of the principles; when it comes to understanding
what a test is trying to do, keeping the unnecessary fluff out is very helpful. You have no idea how many times I've had to suss out the intent of a (usually comment-free) test after it broke when we merged it into our tree. Fortunately that sort of thing
has been happening less often, now that more of our changes have been integrated upstream, but still, it's great to have tests that are very focused….<u></u><u></u></span></a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">….when they are tests for a bugfix or other comparatively small change. I have to say when it comes to a new-feature kind of patch, I would rather have the
test err on the side of completeness.</span></p></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I'm not intending to argue against completeness, to be sure.</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple"><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"> This is partly based on the experience of introducing the 'optnone' attribute to Clang, which IIRC popped up with new and surprising cases two or three times after its introduction.</span></p></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>For the broader discussion about test strategy, I'd love to hear more about these cases (perhaps on another thread) to make sure I/we/community take the right lessons from them to improve the process and provide review feedback that pushes us in a good direction.</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple"><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"> More thorough tests up front could
easily have prevented those surprises. Now here I am again, not with a new attribute but seriously expanding the applicability of an attribute, and would like to apply previous experience and start out with what I think should be a moderately complete test.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">If you're unwilling to accept that argument and insist on minimal upstream tests, okay; I can take what I've done and migrate it into our private tests, and
leave behind only the minimal upstream test. It will leave me with the test I think the feature needs, leaves upstream with the minimal test you prefer, and if something breaks it will just take a little longer to get that feedback.</span></p></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I think that'd be best, if you've got the option to do so/find it necessary.<br><br>Thanks!<br>- Dave</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple"><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Let me know.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Thanks,<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">--paulr<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote></div><br></div></div>