I like the idea - there is quite a bit of complex code in here, and there's something quite nice about the idea of it testing itself!
One thing we might need to be aware of is some of the code being tested may well be running to do the test - it's the old "Observer Effect". I guess we'd just need to look out for this on a case-by-case basis.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
I've set the status to Verified, so yes, put your name against it, checkout the latest code from the SVN trunk and get started! When you're at a suitable point, add your changes to this ticket in the form of a patch file. It doesn't need to be the final "finished" thing - I don't mind applying patches incrementally to a development branch, in fact it's not a bad idea since it allows others to review progress
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
I like the idea - there is quite a bit of complex code in here, and there's something quite nice about the idea of it testing itself!
One thing we might need to be aware of is some of the code being tested may well be running to do the test - it's the old "Observer Effect". I guess we'd just need to look out for this on a case-by-case basis.
Yes - it could be tricky. If I am prepared to start - do I just put my name against it?
I've set the status to Verified, so yes, put your name against it, checkout the latest code from the SVN trunk and get started! When you're at a suitable point, add your changes to this ticket in the form of a patch file. It doesn't need to be the final "finished" thing - I don't mind applying patches incrementally to a development branch, in fact it's not a bad idea since it allows others to review progress
One of the attachments on [bugs:#32] used a "self test" - maybe a starting point? See
ut_utassert.zipon this commentRelated
Bugs Archive (Use GitHub now):
#32