Skip to main content

workbench - MUnit creating a hierarchy of TestSuites


I would like to create a hierarchy of TestSuites. However it appears that it is not possible to call a TestSuite from another TestSuite. So before I go and reinvent the wheel, I thought I would see how others have done (or would) accomplish this.



Details of what I am trying to accomplish


I have grouped packages (and their tests) that perform like functionality by directory. For illustrative purposes lets say I have three subdirectories: importers, manipulators, and processes. I have a TestSuite in each subdirectory named TestAll.mt . I also have one in the top level directory called TestAll.mt that I would like to have call the TestAll.mt in the three subdirectories.



I would like to be able to run the test suites at both the subdirectory and top levels. Running the test suite at the subdirectory level would only run the particular subset of tests, while running the test suite at the top level would run the test suites in all the subdirectories.


I would like to avoid having to add an entry for a particular test to both the subdirectory and top level test suites.


A bonus would be if the top level test suite auto discovered the test suites in the subdirectories (not having to specify the subdirectories in the root test suite), but that is not crucial.


Update



Attempt #1 -- Make a list of .mt files in each of the sub TestAll.mt s. If the top level TestAll.mt is called, the sub levels' lists would be appended to the top level's list and then that list would be supplied to TestSuite. If a sub level's TestAll.mt is called, its list would be supplied as the argument to TestSuite.


Result: Failure


From Workbench, adding any expression to a .mt that contains TestSuite appears to cause none of the tests to run.


x=1;
TestSuite[

    {
        "Test1.mt",
        "Test2.mt"
    }
]

From a notebook, TestSuite shows up in command completion, but does not show up in the MUnit package usage info. Executing the following:


TestSuite[
 {
  "/pathToTests/Test1.mt",

  "/pathToTests/Test2.mt"
  }
 ]

Results in:


TestSuite[{"/pathToTests/Test1.mt", "/pathToTests/Test2.mt"}]

Searched the MUnit package files for TestSuite, no hits.


cd "/Applications/Wolfram Workbench.app/configuration/org.eclipse.osgi/bundles/214/1/.cp/MathematicaSourceVersioned/Head/MUnit"
find . -name "*.m" -print -exec grep TestSuite {} \;



Attempt #2 -- Roll my own TestSuite ...




Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

mathematical optimization - Minimizing using indices, error: Part::pkspec1: The expression cannot be used as a part specification

I want to use Minimize where the variables to minimize are indices pointing into an array. Here a MWE that hopefully shows what my problem is. vars = u@# & /@ Range[3]; cons = Flatten@ { Table[(u[j] != #) & /@ vars[[j + 1 ;; -1]], {j, 1, 3 - 1}], 1 vec1 = {1, 2, 3}; vec2 = {1, 2, 3}; Minimize[{Total@((vec1[[#]] - vec2[[u[#]]])^2 & /@ Range[1, 3]), cons}, vars, Integers] The error I get: Part::pkspec1: The expression u[1] cannot be used as a part specification. >> Answer Ok, it seems that one can get around Mathematica trying to evaluate vec2[[u[1]]] too early by using the function Indexed[vec2,u[1]] . The working MWE would then look like the following: vars = u@# & /@ Range[3]; cons = Flatten@{ Table[(u[j] != #) & /@ vars[[j + 1 ;; -1]], {j, 1, 3 - 1}], 1 vec1 = {1, 2, 3}; vec2 = {1, 2, 3}; NMinimize[ {Total@((vec1[[#]] - Indexed[vec2, u[#]])^2 & /@ R...
Post a Comment
Read more

functions - Get leading series expansion term?

Given a function f[x] , I would like to have a function leadingSeries that returns just the leading term in the series around x=0 . For example: leadingSeries[(1/x + 2)/(4 + 1/x^2 + x)] x and leadingSeries[(1/x + 2 + (1 - 1/x^3)/4)/(4 + x)] -(1/(16 x^3)) Is there such a function in Mathematica? Or maybe one can implement it efficiently? EDIT I finally went with the following implementation, based on Carl Woll 's answer: lds[ex_,x_]:=( (ex/.x->(x+O[x]^2))/.SeriesData[U_,Z_,L_List,Mi_,Ma_,De_]:>SeriesData[U,Z,{L[[1]]},Mi,Mi+1,De]//Quiet//Normal) The advantage is, that this one also properly works with functions whose leading term is a constant: lds[Exp[x],x] 1 Answer Update 1 Updated to eliminate SeriesData and to not return additional terms Perhaps you could use: leadingSeries[expr_, x_] := Normal[expr /. x->(x+O[x]^2) /. a_List :> Take[a, 1]] Then for your examples: leadingSeries[(1/x + 2)/(4 + 1/x^2 + x), x] leadingSeries[Exp[x], x] leadingSeries[(1/x + 2 + (1 - 1/x...
Post a Comment
Read more

What is and isn't a valid variable specification for Manipulate?

I have an expression whose terms have arguments (representing subscripts), like this: myExpr = A[0] + V[1,T] I would like to put it inside a Manipulate to see its value as I move around the parameters. (The goal is eventually to plot it wrt one of the variables inside.) However, Mathematica complains when I set V[1,T] as a manipulated variable: Manipulate[Evaluate[myExpr], {A[0], 0, 1}, {V[1, T], 0, 1}] (*Manipulate::vsform: Manipulate argument {V[1,T],0,1} does not have the correct form for a variable specification. >> *) As a workaround, if I get rid of the symbol T inside the argument, it works fine: Manipulate[ Evaluate[myExpr /. T -> 15], {A[0], 0, 1}, {V[1, 15], 0, 1}] Why this behavior? Can anyone point me to the documentation that says what counts as a valid variable? And is there a way to get Manpiulate to accept an expression with a symbolic argument as a variable? Investigations I've done so far: I tried using variableQ from this answer , but it says V[1...
Post a Comment
Read more