Re: [Cdk-devel] Pubchem Fingerprinter Test Failures

[Egon W. <ego...@gm...>]

On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 9:51 AM, John May <joh...@gm...> wrote:
> Yep you are right. Looking a bit deeper I found that it was to do with
> checking if there were any atoms in an unsaturated ring of a certain size.
> The second one finds there is an unsaturated ring of size 6 (Bit 181) where
> as the first one does not.

So, with those fixes, these three are fixed in cdk-1.4.x too?

http://pele.farmbio.uu.se/nightly-1.4.x/test/result-fingerprint.html

That would really mean an unprecedented unit test depth!

Really, we always have been around 50-60 unit tests before we
introduced the coverage tests. Since then we've been floating around
75-85 failing (fail+error) unit tests for stable releases... indeed,
the number of fails due to missing testing coverage is indeed around
20~ish tests..

We're at 80 fails now, and combine it with the fact that we test
things now that was not tested (and failing) before, the current
cdk-1.4.x really is amazingly stable!

Egon

--
Dr E.L. Willighagen
Postdoctoral Researcher
Department of Bioinformatics - BiGCaT
Maastricht University (http://www.bigcat.unimaas.nl/)
Homepage: http://egonw.github.com/
LinkedIn: http://se.linkedin.com/in/egonw
Blog: http://chem-bla-ics.blogspot.com/
PubList: http://www.citeulike.org/user/egonw/tag/papers