You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
As noted several times, code coverage bounces up and down due to randomized tests. One way of avoiding this is to hardcode all cases to be tested: time consuming, but allows to cover all borderline cases. A simpler way would be to initialize the RNG seed somewhere. Definitely not a major issue, but also serves as reminder that we should put order to tests at some point.
Set at least the RNG seed
De-randomize tests
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I think it may also be dependent on the order the tests on the different
platforms finishes. They seem to differ by the amount that is reported. I
haven't verified this though.
But we should make sure the tests are non random. As well as improving the
tests in student ways, such as looping over tests for different types, and
test that the results are of that right type.
On Wed, Mar 29, 2017, 00:15 Lorenzo Stella ***@***.***> wrote:
As noted several times, code coverage bounces up and down due to
randomized tests. One way of avoiding this is to hardcode all cases to be
tested: time consuming, but allows to cover all borderline cases. A simpler
way would be to initialize the RNG seed somewhere. Definitely not a major
issue, but also serves as reminder that we should put order to tests at
some point.
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#21>, or mute
the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADFlSVpJ9Br4KEhlfM-Lpv9r9pZastQbks5rqYaNgaJpZM4MsQ2H>
.
As noted several times, code coverage bounces up and down due to randomized tests. One way of avoiding this is to hardcode all cases to be tested: time consuming, but allows to cover all borderline cases. A simpler way would be to initialize the RNG seed somewhere. Definitely not a major issue, but also serves as reminder that we should put order to tests at some point.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: