Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Increase test coverage to at least 85% #64

Closed
Datseris opened this issue Dec 17, 2023 · 2 comments
Closed

Increase test coverage to at least 85% #64

Datseris opened this issue Dec 17, 2023 · 2 comments

Comments

@Datseris
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@Datseris
Copy link
Member Author

Guidelines for good tests according to Good Scientific Code workshop:

  • Actually unit: test atomic, self-contained functions. Each test must test only one thing, the unit. When a test fails, it should pinpoint the location of the problem. Testing entire processing pipelines (a.k.a. integration tests) should be done only after units are covered, and only if resources/time allow for it!
  • Known output / Deterministic: tests defined through minimal examples that their result is known analytically are the best tests you can have! If random number generation is necessary, either test valid output range, or use seed for RNG
  • Robust: Test that the expected outcome is met, not the implementation details. Test that the target functionality is met without utilizing knowledge about the internals. Also, never use internal functions in the test suite.
  • High coverage: the more functionality of the code is tested, the better
  • Clean slate: each test file should be runnable by itself, and not rely on previous test files
  • Fast: use the minimal amount of computations to test what is necessary
  • Regression: Whenever a bug is fixed, a test is added for this case
  • Input variety: attempt to cover a wide gambit of input types

@JanJereczek
Copy link
Contributor

Reached with #77

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants