Re: [cclib-devel] missing tests

[Noel O'B. <bao...@gm...>]

On 05/03/07, Karol Langner <kar...@kn...> wrote:
> I did an overview of which attributes are not tested presently. We should have
> tests for all attributes, even if only very simple ones. Here goes:

BTW, it's trivial to use 'coverage.py' to look at parser code
coverage. You might find it interesting.

> 1) aonmaes - should this be in testBasis.py?
I would say testSP.py. There's nothing much to test with aonames,
actually, as it wasn't possible to standardise the names at all. The
only thing to test is the length, probably.

> 2) etenergies, etoscs, etrotats, etsecs, etsyms - these should probably be
> tested repeatedly for the various kinds of calculations that give excited
> states (like testTD.py for the TD-DFT calcs we have files for right now)
Acknowledged. cclib 0.8 should have better 'et' support all around. We
are missing several test files just for TDDFT.

> 3) fonames, fragnames, frags - should be in testSP for ADF, together with
> fooverlaps
I guess so.

> Cheers,
> Karol
>
> --
> written by Karol Langner
> Mon Mar  5 16:43:57 CET 2007
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
> Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
> opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash
> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
> _______________________________________________
> cclib-devel mailing list
> ccl...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cclib-devel
>