Tests: Specify maxSize for long-running properties #517
Conversation
| , testProperty "m1\\m2 ⊆ m1" $ | ||
| \(m1 :: HMKI) (m2 :: HMKI) -> HM.isSubmapOf (HM.difference m1 m2) m1 | ||
| , testProperty "m1 ∩ m2 ≠ ∅ ⇒ m1 ⊈ m1\\m2 " $ | ||
| , testProperty "m1 ∩ m2 ≠ ∅ ⇒ m1 ⊈ m1\\m2 " $ QC.withMaxSize 200 $ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why do we even have this property?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good question. It seems to be the same idea as the m ⊈ delete k m test below. I've deleted this test a few other ones in #518.
| \(x :: HMKI) (y :: HMKI) -> | ||
| toOrdMap (HM.intersection x y) === M.intersection (toOrdMap x) (toOrdMap y) | ||
| , testProperty "valid" $ | ||
| , testProperty "valid" $ QC.withMaxSize 200 $ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why does this test take a long time? I'd much rather have a slightly more complex valid than weaken validity tests. Also, should we reuse the maps generated for the previous test? .&&. will let us know which part failed.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I dug through the validity code, and it all looks like it should be fast. That makes me wonder why this test would take a long time
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Indeed I was misled when I tried to run these tests with stack test --coverage and inflated --quickcheck-max-size. Without the HPC options, the runtimes are entirely unremarkable.
|
Superseded by #519. |
2 participants
No description provided.