Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "creatbinary".
Did you mean:
createbinary
2017 Jul 27
2
Test Error Paths for Expected & ErrorOr
...it's
applied to llvm::object::createBinary():
https://github.com/weliveindetail/ForceAllErrors-in-LLVM/blob/master/test/TestLLVMObject.h#L13
Here it detects and runs 44 different control paths, that can hardly be
covered by a unit test altogether, because they don't depend on the
input to creatBinary() but rather on the environment the test runs in.
Am 27.07.17 um 16:46 schrieb David Blaikie:
> I /kind/ of like the idea - but it almost feels like this would be a
> tool for finding out that test coverage is insufficient, then adding
> tests that actually exercise the bad input, etc (th...
2017 Jul 28
3
Test Error Paths for Expected & ErrorOr
...;> https://github.com/weliveindetail/ForceAllErrors-
>> in-LLVM/blob/master/test/TestLLVMObject.h#L13
>>
>> Here it detects and runs 44 different control paths, that can hardly be
>> covered by a unit test altogether, because they don't depend on the input
>> to creatBinary() but rather on the environment the test runs in.
>>
> Yep, testing OS level environmental failures would be great for this - I
> wonder if there's a good way to distinguish between them (so that this only
> hits those cases, but doesn't unduly 'cover' other cases th...
2017 Jul 31
2
Test Error Paths for Expected & ErrorOr
...https://github.com/weliveindetail/ForceAllErrors-in-LLVM/blob/master/test/TestLLVMObject.h#L13
>>>
>>> Here it detects and runs 44 different control paths, that can hardly be
>>> covered by a unit test altogether, because they don't depend on the input
>>> to creatBinary() but rather on the environment the test runs in.
>>>
>> Yep, testing OS level environmental failures would be great for this - I
>> wonder if there's a good way to distinguish between them (so that this only
>> hits those cases, but doesn't unduly 'cover'...
2017 Jul 27
2
Test Error Paths for Expected & ErrorOr
Hello, this is a call for feedback: opinions, improvements, testers..
I use the support classes Expected<T> and ErrorOr<T> quite often
recently and I like the concept a lot! Thanks Lang btw!
However, from time to time I found issues in the execution paths of my
error cases and got annoyed by their naturally low test coverage.
So I started sketching a test that runs all error paths