Re: Standard testsuite (was: single-xt approach in the standard)

In article <vcgn37$g1rr$1@dont-email.me>, Ruvim  <ruvim.pinka@gmail.com> wrote:

I don't think that all the source codes of a testsuite should be
included into the standard text. It is enough that the standard contains
tests for all words and some of their combinations (as it is now). There
is no need to even include a definition for `t{` — it is enough to
describe the notation that is used for the test cases.

I'm with you here. The test specification is what matters.

I use REGRESS that is left in place in the source.
If you hate this notation, or do not care to implement it,
it is still useful.
You can do
: REGRESS POSTPONE \ ;
and actually I do this if compiling to an executable.

Example:
REGRESS "aap noot mies " "noot" SEARCH ROT NIP S: TRUE 5

Now you can do the test by hand, copying and pasting the
part between REGRESS and S: and inspect the result.

<SNIP>

It seems, there is a *very* small chance that the testsuite will produce
false positive or false negative results due to bugs in some words of
the host Forth system and then terminate normally. It is much more
likely that the testsuite will be aborted during loading/compilation, or
will halt/hang and be interrupted by an external watchdog in such a case.

The tests for the transputer forth were so involved that once the test
harness was in place, there were no more bugs to be found.
(Catching exceptions in a string interpreted from a file included from
a block etc.)
The Hayes test is more of a practical tool to get a system up and running.
Especially useful to get at the corner cases.
Remember the wise words.
Testing can reveal the presence of bugs, not the absence thereof.

--
Ruvim
>

--
Temu exploits Christians: (Disclaimer, only 10 apostles)
Last Supper Acrylic Suncatcher - 15Cm Round Stained Glass- Style Wall
Art For Home, Office And Garden Decor - Perfect For Windows, Bars,
And Gifts For Friends Family And Colleagues.