CddMeeting 05 02 2008 - Revision history

Aleitner: /* CDD Meeting, Wednesday, 06.02.2008, 10:00 */

2008-02-08T15:51:35Z

‎CDD Meeting, Wednesday, 06.02.2008, 10:00

2008-02-07T09:17:29Z

‎Stefan

2008-02-07T09:14:03Z

‎Beta Tester Feedback

2008-02-06T14:49:44Z

2008-02-06T14:04:05Z

‎Unassigned

2008-02-06T13:56:38Z

‎Arno

2008-02-06T13:56:25Z

‎Arno

2008-02-06T13:36:30Z

‎What is the size of the extracted test cases?

2008-02-06T13:35:34Z

‎Are the extracted tests useful for debugging?

2008-02-06T13:17:26Z

‎Are we extracting test cases that reproduce the original failure?

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 == Next Meeting ==
-* Tuesday, 12.02.2008, 10:00
+* Wednesday, 13.02.2008, 10:00
 == Tasks ==

@@ Line 57: / Line 57: @@
 * For big projects (like ES itself) background compilation of the interpreter leads to completely unresponsive ES
 * Crash upon closing of EiffelStudio (feature call on void target in breakpoint tool)
 ===Manu===

@@ Line 81: / Line 81: @@
 ====Beta Tester Feedback====
 (Please put your name so we can get back to you in the case of questions)
-* It should be possible to set the location of the cdd_tests directory (what if location of .ecf file is not readable?) [Jocelyn]
+* (Jocelyn) It should be possible to set the location of the cdd_tests directory (what if location of .ecf file is not readable?) [Jocelyn]
 ** home directory? application_data directory?  [Jocelyn]
-* There should be UI support for deletion of Test Case [Jocelyn]
+* (Jocelyn) There should be UI support for deletion of Test Case [Jocelyn]
-* [BUG] the manual test case creation dialog should check if class with chosen name is already in the system [Jocelyn]
+* (Jocelyn) [BUG] the manual test case creation dialog should check if class with chosen name is already in the system [Jocelyn]
-* It would be nice if there was a way to configure the timeout for the interpreter [Jocelyn]
+* (Jocelyn) It would be nice if there was a way to configure the timeout for the interpreter [Jocelyn]
 == Questionnaires ==

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 [[Category:CDD]]
-=CDD Meeting, Tuesday, 05.02.2008, 10:00=
+=CDD Meeting, Wednesday, 06.02.2008, 10:00=
 == Next Meeting ==

@@ Line 77: / Line 77: @@
 * Only execute unresolved test cases once. Disable them afterwards. (Needs discussion)
 * Cache debug values when extracting several test cases.
 ====Beta Tester Feedback====

@@ Line 28: / Line 28: @@
 * Make general encoding/decoding routines for special feature names
 ** e.g. infix "+" (ES) <=> infix_plus (CDD)
 ====Bug Fixing====
 * Result type (like Current) produces syntax error in new test class

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:56, 6 February 2008
Line 26:		Line 26:
	** Create inline agent test case		** Create inline agent test case
	** Fix extraction for inline agents		** Fix extraction for inline agents
		+	* Make general encoding/decoding routines for special feature names
		+	** e.g. infix "+" (ES) <=> infix_plus (CDD)

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:36, 6 February 2008
Line 171:		Line 171:

	===What is the size of the extracted test cases?===		===What is the size of the extracted test cases?===
		+
		+	===Are we able to reproduce bugs from industry?===
		+	Take bug repository (say EiffelStudio, Gobo, eposix, ...). Use buggy version, try to reproduce bug, see if extracted test case is good.

	===Does it make a difference in the quality of the code, whether one tests manually or extracts them?===		===Does it make a difference in the quality of the code, whether one tests manually or extracts them?===

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:35, 6 February 2008
Line 166:		Line 166:

	===Are the extracted tests useful for debugging?===		===Are the extracted tests useful for debugging?===
		+	* Ask developers, using CDD

	===What is the (time and memory) overhead of enabling extraction?===		===What is the (time and memory) overhead of enabling extraction?===

@@ Line 162: / Line 162: @@
 ==Experiment Hypotheses==
-===Are we extracting test cases that reproduce the original failure?===
+===How reliably can we extract test cases that reproduce the original failure?===
 * Log original exception and exception received from first test execution
 ===Does it make a difference in the quality of the code, whether one tests manually or extracts them?===