[m-rev.] for review: Fix failing tabled_typeclass test case.
zoltan.somogyi at runbox.com
Tue Aug 7 18:46:26 AEST 2018
On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 17:59:40 +1000, Peter Wang <novalazy at gmail.com> wrote:
> > One more general point: for test cases where there are multiple expected
> > outputs I think there needs to be more specific documentation about what
> > each expected output corresponds. While it can sometimes be found
> > in the log messsages, occasionally it's a bit opaque. My suggestion
> > is that the header comment of each test with multiple expected outputs
> > should list what they all are. Opinions?
> I can't think of a simpler solution.
Agreed. We should then require any diff that changes any of the .exp files
of a test to modify all the others as well, if necessary.
> We should be able to modify the test scripts to write out, for each
> passing test, which .exp file was matched in that test grade.
That is also a very good idea, though I believe that in some cases,
the differences between expected output files depend not on grade,
but on things such as which optimizations are applied.
One minor modification: I would modify the test script to write out
the name of the matched .exp file *only* if there is more than one.
More information about the reviews