![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
We made unit tests to check complicated stuff like OLC realtime
calculations, FAI triangle calculations and such, in the development phase. But generally I called "unit tests" the people doing individual checking of each beta versions, and the experience shew that you need at least 300 of them for 3 months to be relatively sure everything is ok. This is why I have brought the beta phase to almost 12 months. One way or another, you still need beta testing because obvious problems are easy to fix, while the nasty stuff is always obfuscated and for Murphy's laws will pass all unit tests, because tests did not consider the problem (otherwise, you would have fixed it already). Best would be to have both, of course. Xcsoar and LK can have hundreds of betatesters, and dozens of eyes checking at the code and spotting problems. But in the end, people doing debugging are just a few around the world, for both projects. You can count people doing this work on xcsoar and lk8000 with fingers of one hand. "Tobias Bieniek" wrote in message ... We're all using our free time in a way which makes sense and fun. Finding bugs, correcting them and even rewriting code just because once in the past we took some shortcuts and now we're seeing the unwanted effects is not fun. Well... actually... I've been doing exactly that for three years on the XCSoar project now and let me tell you that this can be fun too. For me it was a learning experience that ultimately got me my current job and a few other things before that. and @Paolo: why do you have unit tests if you don't even trust them? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Tuesday, December 11, 2012 5:18:29 PM UTC+1, pcool wrote:
We made unit tests to check complicated stuff like OLC realtime calculations, FAI triangle calculations and such, in the development phase. Your use of the plural "tests" implies that there is more than one. However, that's an exaggeration, there's only one program (TestContest), and it's not even a unit test. But generally I called "unit tests" the people doing individual checking of each beta versions, and the experience shew that you need at least 300 of them for 3 months to be relatively sure everything is ok. This is why I have brought the beta phase to almost 12 months. People are not unit tests. I think you misunderstand the meaning of the word "unit test", which is what this thread is about. You dismiss them as "useless" which you know too little about. One way or another, you still need beta testing because obvious problems are easy to fix, while the nasty stuff is always obfuscated and for Murphy's laws will pass all unit tests, because tests did not consider the problem (otherwise, you would have fixed it already). Not quite. We XCSoar developers fix a lot of bugs that are found by unit tests. By the time new code gets published, these bugs are fixed already. Unit tests help a lot during development, and save a lot of time. Just look how many bugs you had to fix last week, that would not have happened with unit tests. You can count people doing this work on xcsoar and lk8000 with fingers of one hand. Hm. 4,638 pilots have installed XCSoar 6.5 preview releases on Android alone (number of unique Google accounts, no duplicates). The stable 6.4 version has been installed on Android by 22,005 pilots. Not counting all those people on Linux, Windows, WinCE, Mac OS X. Our bug tracker has 415 user accounts and 2,400 bug reports in the past 3 years. Lots of eyes, lots of bugs & bug fixes! What makes me wonder is why you rejected the bug fixes I sent you today: https://github.com/LK8000/LK8000/pull/307 |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
You wont find on github the test procedures for Contest and FAI, the latest
I remember. The contest test you mention is not the one we used. In either cases I did not make them. However this is not the point. I agree that having internal tests is better than not having them! Of course. Our 289 internal checks made with assertions can help, and did help, but cannot be compared to your unit tests. Honestly I cannot judge your code because I dont know it at all, but I am sure it is well thought for this part as well. You know the reason why I dont merge your code already, and it is not worth discussing it here for a simple reason, which I think you agree on. Some software manufacturers are just upset, to use a minimalistic word, by the fact free software is now at a quality standpoint that is making a real alternative to commercial products. Having one free software is already a pain, having two is simply killing someone business. It looks pretty funny to them, and not only , to read yours and mine argumentations about how good or how bad one software is. "Max Kellermann" wrote in message ... On Tuesday, December 11, 2012 5:18:29 PM UTC+1, pcool wrote: We made unit tests to check complicated stuff like OLC realtime calculations, FAI triangle calculations and such, in the development phase. Your use of the plural "tests" implies that there is more than one. However, that's an exaggeration, there's only one program (TestContest), and it's not even a unit test. But generally I called "unit tests" the people doing individual checking of each beta versions, and the experience shew that you need at least 300 of them for 3 months to be relatively sure everything is ok. This is why I have brought the beta phase to almost 12 months. People are not unit tests. I think you misunderstand the meaning of the word "unit test", which is what this thread is about. You dismiss them as "useless" which you know too little about. One way or another, you still need beta testing because obvious problems are easy to fix, while the nasty stuff is always obfuscated and for Murphy's laws will pass all unit tests, because tests did not consider the problem (otherwise, you would have fixed it already). Not quite. We XCSoar developers fix a lot of bugs that are found by unit tests. By the time new code gets published, these bugs are fixed already. Unit tests help a lot during development, and save a lot of time. Just look how many bugs you had to fix last week, that would not have happened with unit tests. You can count people doing this work on xcsoar and lk8000 with fingers of one hand. Hm. 4,638 pilots have installed XCSoar 6.5 preview releases on Android alone (number of unique Google accounts, no duplicates). The stable 6.4 version has been installed on Android by 22,005 pilots. Not counting all those people on Linux, Windows, WinCE, Mac OS X. Our bug tracker has 415 user accounts and 2,400 bug reports in the past 3 years. Lots of eyes, lots of bugs & bug fixes! What makes me wonder is why you rejected the bug fixes I sent you today: https://github.com/LK8000/LK8000/pull/307 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Non-Stop Soaring Film Fest: Showcasing The Best Soaring Videos | Kemp[_2_] | Soaring | 20 | December 21st 11 09:25 AM |
Stop FireFox From Broadcasting Time & Date - READ THIS! | heirophant | Piloting | 4 | February 7th 11 03:54 AM |
Webbased software for managing time of takeoff and landings | [email protected] | Soaring | 0 | June 10th 08 02:14 PM |
Cross Country the main focus of soaring? | mat Redsell | Soaring | 77 | October 18th 04 10:40 PM |
Soaring Software Academy before SSA Convention | Paul Remde | Soaring | 5 | October 8th 04 03:59 AM |