Hi,
I ran some tests and found a couple that are failing. I also checked and found these tests don't fail in my 5.1 image.
BrowserTest>>#testBuildMessageCategoryBrowserEditString DebuggerExtensionsTest>>#testCollectionsGeneralise
I think the first one might actually be a case where a bug was fixed. The test fails because of a timeout, because there is a dialog on-screen which is not returning. Not sure, but the test may be intended to declare that the dialog should appear, and now it is (?).
The second one, I don't understand. There is no comment.
Image/VM info:
Squeak6.0alpha latest update: #17922 Image format 6521 (32 bit)
Virtual Machine --------------- C:\Users\tcj\Desktop\squeak.cog.spur_win32x86_201803080952\Squeak.exe Croquet Closure Cog[Spur] VM [CoInterpreterPrimitives VMMaker.oscog-eem.2347] Win32 built on Mar 8 2018 11:08:39 GMT Compiler: 6.4.0 platform sources revision VM: 201803080952
Cheers, Tim
On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 10:36:17PM -0500, Tim Johnson wrote:
Hi,
I ran some tests and found a couple that are failing. I also checked and found these tests don't fail in my 5.1 image.
BrowserTest>>#testBuildMessageCategoryBrowserEditString DebuggerExtensionsTest>>#testCollectionsGeneralise
I think the first one might actually be a case where a bug was fixed. The test fails because of a timeout, because there is a dialog on-screen which is not returning. Not sure, but the test may be intended to declare that the dialog should appear, and now it is (?).
The second one, I don't understand. There is no comment.
I don't understand it either, and strangely it has no method timestamp. But the test was was introduced in April 2013 in this update:
Name: ToolsTests-fbs.62 Author: fbs Time: 19 April 2013, 8:43:40.116 am UUID: 926d563e-d57b-44ec-b4e7-672010293c2b Ancestors: ToolsTests-nice.61
Tests for the new #canonicalArgumentName Debugger methods.
This is part of test coverage for #canonicalArgumentName, which is implemented in Object and also has no method timestamp or comment (!!!).
The canonicalArgumentName method is sent by many unit tests, so it has very good coverage (even though I don't know the significance of this failing test).
Aside from unit tests, it is sent by Message>>createStubMethod and appears to be used when the debugger provides a template for implementing a missing method, or for implementing a method override.
The test does this:
testCollectionsGeneralise self assert: Collection name equals: Array new canonicalArgumentName. self assert: Collection name equals: OrderedCollection new canonicalArgumentName. self assert: Collection name equals: LinkedList new canonicalArgumentName
This looks like a regression that should be fixed such that the tests pass again, and that also deserves a good method comment in Object>>cononicalArgumentName.
I think that some more background and explanation can probably be found on squeak-dev circa April 2013, notably this reference:
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2013-April/170506.htm...
Which points to this:
Name: Tools-fbs.460 Author: fbs Time: 19 April 2013, 8:40:24.143 am UUID: d5cf82c4-bda7-48ff-bfbd-e8b27d0a07d7 Ancestors: Tools-fbs.459
When creating a stub method, give the argument names that represent the (usual) desired name more accurately. For instance, Arrays, OrderedCollections and Sets all result in 'aCollection', ByteStrings and WideStrings in 'aString', and so on.
So perhaps that last paragraph about "when creating a stub method..." might serve as a method comment for Object>>cononicalArgumentName?
Dave
Image/VM info:
Squeak6.0alpha latest update: #17922 Image format 6521 (32 bit)
Virtual Machine
C:\Users\tcj\Desktop\squeak.cog.spur_win32x86_201803080952\Squeak.exe Croquet Closure Cog[Spur] VM [CoInterpreterPrimitives VMMaker.oscog-eem.2347] Win32 built on Mar 8 2018 11:08:39 GMT Compiler: 6.4.0 platform sources revision VM: 201803080952
Cheers, Tim
On 30 April 2018 at 13:23, David T. Lewis lewis@mail.msen.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 10:36:17PM -0500, Tim Johnson wrote:
Hi,
I ran some tests and found a couple that are failing. I also checked and found these tests don't fail in my 5.1 image.
BrowserTest>>#testBuildMessageCategoryBrowserEditString DebuggerExtensionsTest>>#testCollectionsGeneralise
I think the first one might actually be a case where a bug was fixed. The test fails because of a timeout, because there is a dialog on-screen which is not returning. Not sure, but the test may be intended to declare that the dialog should appear, and now it is (?).
The second one, I don't understand. There is no comment.
I don't understand it either, and strangely it has no method timestamp. But the test was was introduced in April 2013 in this update:
Name: ToolsTests-fbs.62 Author: fbs Time: 19 April 2013, 8:43:40.116 am UUID: 926d563e-d57b-44ec-b4e7-672010293c2b Ancestors: ToolsTests-nice.61
Tests for the new #canonicalArgumentName Debugger methods.
This is part of test coverage for #canonicalArgumentName, which is implemented in Object and also has no method timestamp or comment (!!!).
The canonicalArgumentName method is sent by many unit tests, so it has very good coverage (even though I don't know the significance of this failing test).
Aside from unit tests, it is sent by Message>>createStubMethod and appears to be used when the debugger provides a template for implementing a missing method, or for implementing a method override.
The test does this:
testCollectionsGeneralise self assert: Collection name equals: Array new canonicalArgumentName. self assert: Collection name equals: OrderedCollection new canonicalArgumentName. self assert: Collection name equals: LinkedList new canonicalArgumentName
This looks like a regression that should be fixed such that the tests pass again, and that also deserves a good method comment in Object>>cononicalArgumentName.
I think that some more background and explanation can probably be found on squeak-dev circa April 2013, notably this reference:
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2013- April/170506.html
Which points to this:
Name: Tools-fbs.460 Author: fbs Time: 19 April 2013, 8:40:24.143 am UUID: d5cf82c4-bda7-48ff-bfbd-e8b27d0a07d7 Ancestors: Tools-fbs.459
When creating a stub method, give the argument names that represent the (usual) desired name more accurately. For instance, Arrays, OrderedCollections and Sets all result in 'aCollection', ByteStrings and WideStrings in 'aString', and so on.
So perhaps that last paragraph about "when creating a stub method..." might serve as a method comment for Object>>cononicalArgumentName?
Dave
It was part of my work to improve the "JIT development" workflow, aka "debugger driven development". See http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2013-April/170693.htm... and http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=7761
frank
Image/VM info:
Squeak6.0alpha latest update: #17922 Image format 6521 (32 bit)
Virtual Machine
C:\Users\tcj\Desktop\squeak.cog.spur_win32x86_201803080952\Squeak.exe Croquet Closure Cog[Spur] VM [CoInterpreterPrimitives VMMaker.oscog-eem.2347] Win32 built on Mar 8 2018 11:08:39 GMT Compiler: 6.4.0 platform sources revision VM: 201803080952
Cheers, Tim
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 02:13:15PM -0700, Frank Shearar wrote:
On 30 April 2018 at 13:23, David T. Lewis lewis@mail.msen.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 10:36:17PM -0500, Tim Johnson wrote:
Hi,
I ran some tests and found a couple that are failing. I also checked and found these tests don't fail in my 5.1 image.
BrowserTest>>#testBuildMessageCategoryBrowserEditString DebuggerExtensionsTest>>#testCollectionsGeneralise
I think the first one might actually be a case where a bug was fixed. The test fails because of a timeout, because there is a dialog on-screen which is not returning. Not sure, but the test may be intended to declare that the dialog should appear, and now it is (?).
The second one, I don't understand. There is no comment.
I don't understand it either, and strangely it has no method timestamp. But the test was was introduced in April 2013 in this update:
Name: ToolsTests-fbs.62 Author: fbs Time: 19 April 2013, 8:43:40.116 am UUID: 926d563e-d57b-44ec-b4e7-672010293c2b Ancestors: ToolsTests-nice.61
Tests for the new #canonicalArgumentName Debugger methods.
This is part of test coverage for #canonicalArgumentName, which is implemented in Object and also has no method timestamp or comment (!!!).
The canonicalArgumentName method is sent by many unit tests, so it has very good coverage (even though I don't know the significance of this failing test).
Aside from unit tests, it is sent by Message>>createStubMethod and appears to be used when the debugger provides a template for implementing a missing method, or for implementing a method override.
The test does this:
testCollectionsGeneralise self assert: Collection name equals: Array new canonicalArgumentName. self assert: Collection name equals: OrderedCollection new canonicalArgumentName. self assert: Collection name equals: LinkedList new canonicalArgumentName
This looks like a regression that should be fixed such that the tests pass again, and that also deserves a good method comment in Object>>cononicalArgumentName.
I think that some more background and explanation can probably be found on squeak-dev circa April 2013, notably this reference:
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2013- April/170506.html
Which points to this:
Name: Tools-fbs.460 Author: fbs Time: 19 April 2013, 8:40:24.143 am UUID: d5cf82c4-bda7-48ff-bfbd-e8b27d0a07d7 Ancestors: Tools-fbs.459
When creating a stub method, give the argument names that represent the (usual) desired name more accurately. For instance, Arrays, OrderedCollections and Sets all result in 'aCollection', ByteStrings and WideStrings in 'aString', and so on.
So perhaps that last paragraph about "when creating a stub method..." might serve as a method comment for Object>>cononicalArgumentName?
Dave
It was part of my work to improve the "JIT development" workflow, aka "debugger driven development". See http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2013-April/170693.htm... and http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=7761
Thanks Frank,
And kudos for the test coverage, it is the sort of thing that almost certainly would have gone unnoticed otherwise.
Checking what has changed, the following two additions to the image account for the test failure:
ArrayedCollection>>canonicalArgumentName ==> 'Array' SequenceableCollection>>canonicalArgumentName ==> 'Sequence'
These entered the image here:
Name: Tools-eem.788 Author: eem Time: 6 January 2018, 3:37:50.088654 pm UUID: bb90e476-4cf4-47bd-a8be-bc2785cc8504 Ancestors: Tools-eem.787
Add some more canonicalArgumentName implementations for well-known Collection subclasses.
So apparently the right thing to do is to update the unit tests to reflect these additions.
Dave
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 07:28:03PM -0400, David T. Lewis wrote:
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 02:13:15PM -0700, Frank Shearar wrote:
On 30 April 2018 at 13:23, David T. Lewis lewis@mail.msen.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 10:36:17PM -0500, Tim Johnson wrote:
Hi,
I ran some tests and found a couple that are failing. I also checked and found these tests don't fail in my 5.1 image.
BrowserTest>>#testBuildMessageCategoryBrowserEditString DebuggerExtensionsTest>>#testCollectionsGeneralise
I think the first one might actually be a case where a bug was fixed. The test fails because of a timeout, because there is a dialog on-screen which is not returning. Not sure, but the test may be intended to declare that the dialog should appear, and now it is (?).
The second one, I don't understand. There is no comment.
I don't understand it either, and strangely it has no method timestamp. But the test was was introduced in April 2013 in this update:
Name: ToolsTests-fbs.62 Author: fbs Time: 19 April 2013, 8:43:40.116 am UUID: 926d563e-d57b-44ec-b4e7-672010293c2b Ancestors: ToolsTests-nice.61
Tests for the new #canonicalArgumentName Debugger methods.
This is part of test coverage for #canonicalArgumentName, which is implemented in Object and also has no method timestamp or comment (!!!).
The canonicalArgumentName method is sent by many unit tests, so it has very good coverage (even though I don't know the significance of this failing test).
Aside from unit tests, it is sent by Message>>createStubMethod and appears to be used when the debugger provides a template for implementing a missing method, or for implementing a method override.
The test does this:
testCollectionsGeneralise self assert: Collection name equals: Array new canonicalArgumentName. self assert: Collection name equals: OrderedCollection new canonicalArgumentName. self assert: Collection name equals: LinkedList new canonicalArgumentName
This looks like a regression that should be fixed such that the tests pass again, and that also deserves a good method comment in Object>>cononicalArgumentName.
I think that some more background and explanation can probably be found on squeak-dev circa April 2013, notably this reference:
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2013- April/170506.html
Which points to this:
Name: Tools-fbs.460 Author: fbs Time: 19 April 2013, 8:40:24.143 am UUID: d5cf82c4-bda7-48ff-bfbd-e8b27d0a07d7 Ancestors: Tools-fbs.459
When creating a stub method, give the argument names that represent the (usual) desired name more accurately. For instance, Arrays, OrderedCollections and Sets all result in 'aCollection', ByteStrings and WideStrings in 'aString', and so on.
So perhaps that last paragraph about "when creating a stub method..." might serve as a method comment for Object>>cononicalArgumentName?
Dave
It was part of my work to improve the "JIT development" workflow, aka "debugger driven development". See http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2013-April/170693.htm... and http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=7761
Thanks Frank,
And kudos for the test coverage, it is the sort of thing that almost certainly would have gone unnoticed otherwise.
Checking what has changed, the following two additions to the image account for the test failure:
ArrayedCollection>>canonicalArgumentName ==> 'Array' SequenceableCollection>>canonicalArgumentName ==> 'Sequence'
These entered the image here:
Name: Tools-eem.788 Author: eem Time: 6 January 2018, 3:37:50.088654 pm UUID: bb90e476-4cf4-47bd-a8be-bc2785cc8504 Ancestors: Tools-eem.787
Add some more canonicalArgumentName implementations for well-known Collection subclasses.
So apparently the right thing to do is to update the unit tests to reflect these additions.
At the risk of contradicting myself yet again,
According to testCollectionsGeneralise, we should have:
The argument prototype for an Array is 'aCollection' The argument prototype for an OrderedCollection is 'aCollection' The argument prototype for a LinkedList is 'aCollection'
However, in trunk we have this:
The argument prototype for an Array is 'anArray' The argument prototype for an OrderedCollection is 'aSequence' The argument prototype for a LinkedList is 'aSequence'
The original behavior as documented in the test seems better to me.
Opinions? Change the test, or revert the changes that lead to the test failure?
Dave
I LIKE Array being anArray but the others being aCollection. But that's just me.
aSequence sound weird to me
Cbc
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018, 18:03 David T. Lewis lewis@mail.msen.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 07:28:03PM -0400, David T. Lewis wrote:
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 02:13:15PM -0700, Frank Shearar wrote:
On 30 April 2018 at 13:23, David T. Lewis lewis@mail.msen.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 10:36:17PM -0500, Tim Johnson wrote:
Hi,
I ran some tests and found a couple that are failing. I also
checked
and found these tests don't fail in my 5.1 image.
BrowserTest>>#testBuildMessageCategoryBrowserEditString DebuggerExtensionsTest>>#testCollectionsGeneralise
I think the first one might actually be a case where a bug was
fixed.
The test fails because of a timeout, because there is a dialog
on-screen
which is not returning. Not sure, but the test may be intended to declare that the dialog should appear, and now it is (?).
The second one, I don't understand. There is no comment.
I don't understand it either, and strangely it has no method
timestamp.
But the test was was introduced in April 2013 in this update:
Name: ToolsTests-fbs.62 Author: fbs Time: 19 April 2013, 8:43:40.116 am UUID: 926d563e-d57b-44ec-b4e7-672010293c2b Ancestors: ToolsTests-nice.61
Tests for the new #canonicalArgumentName Debugger methods.
This is part of test coverage for #canonicalArgumentName, which is implemented in Object and also has no method timestamp or comment (!!!).
The canonicalArgumentName method is sent by many unit tests, so it
has very
good coverage (even though I don't know the significance of this
failing
test).
Aside from unit tests, it is sent by Message>>createStubMethod and
appears
to be used when the debugger provides a template for implementing a
missing
method, or for implementing a method override.
The test does this:
testCollectionsGeneralise self assert: Collection name equals: Array new
canonicalArgumentName.
self assert: Collection name equals: OrderedCollection newcanonicalArgumentName. self assert: Collection name equals: LinkedList new canonicalArgumentName
This looks like a regression that should be fixed such that the
tests pass
again, and that also deserves a good method comment in Object>>cononicalArgumentName.
I think that some more background and explanation can probably be
found on
squeak-dev circa April 2013, notably this reference:
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2013- April/170506.html
Which points to this:
Name: Tools-fbs.460 Author: fbs Time: 19 April 2013, 8:40:24.143 am UUID: d5cf82c4-bda7-48ff-bfbd-e8b27d0a07d7 Ancestors: Tools-fbs.459
When creating a stub method, give the argument names that
represent the
(usual) desired name more accurately. For instance, Arrays, OrderedCollections and Sets all result in 'aCollection', ByteStrings and WideStrings
in
'aString', and so on.
So perhaps that last paragraph about "when creating a stub method..." might serve as a method comment for Object>>cononicalArgumentName?
Dave
It was part of my work to improve the "JIT development" workflow, aka "debugger driven development". See
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2013-April/170693.htm...
Thanks Frank,
And kudos for the test coverage, it is the sort of thing that almost certainly would have gone unnoticed otherwise.
Checking what has changed, the following two additions to the image
account for the test failure:
ArrayedCollection>>canonicalArgumentName ==> 'Array' SequenceableCollection>>canonicalArgumentName ==> 'Sequence'
These entered the image here:
Name: Tools-eem.788 Author: eem Time: 6 January 2018, 3:37:50.088654 pm UUID: bb90e476-4cf4-47bd-a8be-bc2785cc8504 Ancestors: Tools-eem.787
Add some more canonicalArgumentName implementations for well-known
Collection subclasses.
So apparently the right thing to do is to update the unit tests to
reflect these additions.
At the risk of contradicting myself yet again,
According to testCollectionsGeneralise, we should have:
The argument prototype for an Array is 'aCollection' The argument prototype for an OrderedCollection is 'aCollection' The argument prototype for a LinkedList is 'aCollection'
However, in trunk we have this:
The argument prototype for an Array is 'anArray' The argument prototype for an OrderedCollection is 'aSequence' The argument prototype for a LinkedList is 'aSequence'
The original behavior as documented in the test seems better to me.
Opinions? Change the test, or revert the changes that lead to the test failure?
Dave
That sounds right to me also.
@eliot - do you have a view on this? The fix would involve reverting one of your changes from Tools-eem.788.
Summary: The proposed fix for the DebuggerExtensionsTest>>#testCollectionsGeneralise test failure would be:
1) Change the test to say this:
self assert: Collection name equals: Array new canonicalArgumentName.
instead of this:
self assert: Collection name equals: Array new canonicalArgumentName.
2) Delete the SequenceableCollection>>canonicalArgumentName that was added in Tools-eem.788
With those two changes, the test passes and the generated argument names seem reasonable.
Dave
On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 01:48:48AM +0000, Chris Cunningham wrote:
I LIKE Array being anArray but the others being aCollection. But that's just me.
aSequence sound weird to me
Cbc
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018, 18:03 David T. Lewis lewis@mail.msen.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 07:28:03PM -0400, David T. Lewis wrote:
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 02:13:15PM -0700, Frank Shearar wrote:
On 30 April 2018 at 13:23, David T. Lewis lewis@mail.msen.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 10:36:17PM -0500, Tim Johnson wrote:
Hi,
I ran some tests and found a couple that are failing. I also
checked
and found these tests don't fail in my 5.1 image.
BrowserTest>>#testBuildMessageCategoryBrowserEditString DebuggerExtensionsTest>>#testCollectionsGeneralise
I think the first one might actually be a case where a bug was
fixed.
The test fails because of a timeout, because there is a dialog
on-screen
which is not returning. Not sure, but the test may be intended to declare that the dialog should appear, and now it is (?).
The second one, I don't understand. There is no comment.
I don't understand it either, and strangely it has no method
timestamp.
But the test was was introduced in April 2013 in this update:
Name: ToolsTests-fbs.62 Author: fbs Time: 19 April 2013, 8:43:40.116 am UUID: 926d563e-d57b-44ec-b4e7-672010293c2b Ancestors: ToolsTests-nice.61
Tests for the new #canonicalArgumentName Debugger methods.
This is part of test coverage for #canonicalArgumentName, which is implemented in Object and also has no method timestamp or comment (!!!).
The canonicalArgumentName method is sent by many unit tests, so it
has very
good coverage (even though I don't know the significance of this
failing
test).
Aside from unit tests, it is sent by Message>>createStubMethod and
appears
to be used when the debugger provides a template for implementing a
missing
method, or for implementing a method override.
The test does this:
testCollectionsGeneralise self assert: Collection name equals: Array new
canonicalArgumentName.
self assert: Collection name equals: OrderedCollection newcanonicalArgumentName. self assert: Collection name equals: LinkedList new canonicalArgumentName
This looks like a regression that should be fixed such that the
tests pass
again, and that also deserves a good method comment in Object>>cononicalArgumentName.
I think that some more background and explanation can probably be
found on
squeak-dev circa April 2013, notably this reference:
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2013- April/170506.html
Which points to this:
Name: Tools-fbs.460 Author: fbs Time: 19 April 2013, 8:40:24.143 am UUID: d5cf82c4-bda7-48ff-bfbd-e8b27d0a07d7 Ancestors: Tools-fbs.459
When creating a stub method, give the argument names that
represent the
(usual) desired name more accurately. For instance, Arrays, OrderedCollections and Sets all result in 'aCollection', ByteStrings and WideStrings
in
'aString', and so on.
So perhaps that last paragraph about "when creating a stub method..." might serve as a method comment for Object>>cononicalArgumentName?
Dave
It was part of my work to improve the "JIT development" workflow, aka "debugger driven development". See
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2013-April/170693.htm...
Thanks Frank,
And kudos for the test coverage, it is the sort of thing that almost certainly would have gone unnoticed otherwise.
Checking what has changed, the following two additions to the image
account for the test failure:
ArrayedCollection>>canonicalArgumentName ==> 'Array' SequenceableCollection>>canonicalArgumentName ==> 'Sequence'
These entered the image here:
Name: Tools-eem.788 Author: eem Time: 6 January 2018, 3:37:50.088654 pm UUID: bb90e476-4cf4-47bd-a8be-bc2785cc8504 Ancestors: Tools-eem.787
Add some more canonicalArgumentName implementations for well-known
Collection subclasses.
So apparently the right thing to do is to update the unit tests to
reflect these additions.
At the risk of contradicting myself yet again,
According to testCollectionsGeneralise, we should have:
The argument prototype for an Array is 'aCollection' The argument prototype for an OrderedCollection is 'aCollection' The argument prototype for a LinkedList is 'aCollection'
However, in trunk we have this:
The argument prototype for an Array is 'anArray' The argument prototype for an OrderedCollection is 'aSequence' The argument prototype for a LinkedList is 'aSequence'
The original behavior as documented in the test seems better to me.
Opinions? Change the test, or revert the changes that lead to the test failure?
Dave
David/Elliot,
I think David means:
1) Change the test to say this:
self assert: Array name equals: Array new canonicalArgumentName.
instead of this:
self assert: Collection name equals: Array new canonicalArgumentName.
Plus the rest.
On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 6:13 PM, David T. Lewis lewis@mail.msen.com wrote:
That sounds right to me also.
@eliot - do you have a view on this? The fix would involve reverting one of your changes from Tools-eem.788.
Summary: The proposed fix for the DebuggerExtensionsTest>># testCollectionsGeneralise test failure would be:
Change the test to say this:
self assert: Collection name equals: Array newcanonicalArgumentName.
instead of this:
self assert: Collection name equals: Array newcanonicalArgumentName.
- Delete the SequenceableCollection>>canonicalArgumentName that was
added in Tools-eem.788
With those two changes, the test passes and the generated argument names seem reasonable.
Dave
On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 01:48:48AM +0000, Chris Cunningham wrote:
I LIKE Array being anArray but the others being aCollection. But that's just me.
aSequence sound weird to me
Cbc
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018, 18:03 David T. Lewis lewis@mail.msen.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 07:28:03PM -0400, David T. Lewis wrote:
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 02:13:15PM -0700, Frank Shearar wrote:
On 30 April 2018 at 13:23, David T. Lewis lewis@mail.msen.com
wrote:
On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 10:36:17PM -0500, Tim Johnson wrote: > Hi, > > I ran some tests and found a couple that are failing. I also
checked
> and found these tests don't fail in my 5.1 image. > > BrowserTest>>#testBuildMessageCategoryBrowserEditString > DebuggerExtensionsTest>>#testCollectionsGeneralise > > I think the first one might actually be a case where a bug was
fixed.
> The test fails because of a timeout, because there is a dialog
on-screen
> which is not returning. Not sure, but the test may be
intended to
> declare that the dialog should appear, and now it is (?). > > The second one, I don't understand. There is no comment.
I don't understand it either, and strangely it has no method
timestamp.
But the test was was introduced in April 2013 in this update:
Name: ToolsTests-fbs.62 Author: fbs Time: 19 April 2013, 8:43:40.116 am UUID: 926d563e-d57b-44ec-b4e7-672010293c2b Ancestors: ToolsTests-nice.61
Tests for the new #canonicalArgumentName Debugger methods.
This is part of test coverage for #canonicalArgumentName, which
is
implemented in Object and also has no method timestamp or comment (!!!).
The canonicalArgumentName method is sent by many unit tests, so
it
has very
good coverage (even though I don't know the significance of this
failing
test).
Aside from unit tests, it is sent by Message>>createStubMethod
and
appears
to be used when the debugger provides a template for
implementing a
missing
method, or for implementing a method override.
The test does this:
testCollectionsGeneralise self assert: Collection name equals: Array new
canonicalArgumentName.
self assert: Collection name equals: OrderedCollection newcanonicalArgumentName. self assert: Collection name equals: LinkedList new canonicalArgumentName
This looks like a regression that should be fixed such that the
tests pass
again, and that also deserves a good method comment in Object>>cononicalArgumentName.
I think that some more background and explanation can probably be
found on
squeak-dev circa April 2013, notably this reference:
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2013- April/170506.html
Which points to this:
Name: Tools-fbs.460 Author: fbs Time: 19 April 2013, 8:40:24.143 am UUID: d5cf82c4-bda7-48ff-bfbd-e8b27d0a07d7 Ancestors: Tools-fbs.459
When creating a stub method, give the argument names that
represent the
(usual) desired name more accurately. For instance, Arrays, OrderedCollections and Sets all result in 'aCollection', ByteStrings and
WideStrings
in
'aString', and so on.
So perhaps that last paragraph about "when creating a stub
method..."
might serve as a method comment for Object>>cononicalArgumentName?
Dave
It was part of my work to improve the "JIT development" workflow,
aka
"debugger driven development". See
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2013-
April/170693.html
Thanks Frank,
And kudos for the test coverage, it is the sort of thing that almost certainly would have gone unnoticed otherwise.
Checking what has changed, the following two additions to the image
account for the test failure:
ArrayedCollection>>canonicalArgumentName ==> 'Array' SequenceableCollection>>canonicalArgumentName ==> 'Sequence'
These entered the image here:
Name: Tools-eem.788 Author: eem Time: 6 January 2018, 3:37:50.088654 pm UUID: bb90e476-4cf4-47bd-a8be-bc2785cc8504 Ancestors: Tools-eem.787
Add some more canonicalArgumentName implementations for well-known
Collection subclasses.
So apparently the right thing to do is to update the unit tests to
reflect these additions.
At the risk of contradicting myself yet again,
According to testCollectionsGeneralise, we should have:
The argument prototype for an Array is 'aCollection' The argument prototype for an OrderedCollection is 'aCollection' The argument prototype for a LinkedList is 'aCollection'
However, in trunk we have this:
The argument prototype for an Array is 'anArray' The argument prototype for an OrderedCollection is 'aSequence' The argument prototype for a LinkedList is 'aSequence'
The original behavior as documented in the test seems better to me.
Opinions? Change the test, or revert the changes that lead to the test failure?
Dave
Sorry, yes that is what I meant to say.
Dave
On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 08:04:41PM -0700, Chris Cunningham wrote:
David/Elliot,
I think David means:
Change the test to say this:
self assert: Array name equals: Array new canonicalArgumentName.instead of this:
self assert: Collection name equals: Array newcanonicalArgumentName.
Plus the rest.
On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 6:13 PM, David T. Lewis lewis@mail.msen.com wrote:
That sounds right to me also.
@eliot - do you have a view on this? The fix would involve reverting one of your changes from Tools-eem.788.
Summary: The proposed fix for the DebuggerExtensionsTest>># testCollectionsGeneralise test failure would be:
Change the test to say this:
self assert: Collection name equals: Array newcanonicalArgumentName.
instead of this:
self assert: Collection name equals: Array newcanonicalArgumentName.
- Delete the SequenceableCollection>>canonicalArgumentName that was
added in Tools-eem.788
With those two changes, the test passes and the generated argument names seem reasonable.
Dave
On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 01:48:48AM +0000, Chris Cunningham wrote:
I LIKE Array being anArray but the others being aCollection. But that's just me.
aSequence sound weird to me
Cbc
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018, 18:03 David T. Lewis lewis@mail.msen.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 07:28:03PM -0400, David T. Lewis wrote:
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 02:13:15PM -0700, Frank Shearar wrote:
On 30 April 2018 at 13:23, David T. Lewis lewis@mail.msen.com
wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 10:36:17PM -0500, Tim Johnson wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I ran some tests and found a couple that are failing. I also
checked
> > and found these tests don't fail in my 5.1 image. > > > > BrowserTest>>#testBuildMessageCategoryBrowserEditString > > DebuggerExtensionsTest>>#testCollectionsGeneralise > > > > I think the first one might actually be a case where a bug was
fixed.
> > The test fails because of a timeout, because there is a dialog
on-screen
> > which is not returning. Not sure, but the test may be
intended to
> > declare that the dialog should appear, and now it is (?). > > > > The second one, I don't understand. There is no comment. > > I don't understand it either, and strangely it has no method
timestamp.
> But the test was was introduced in April 2013 in this update: > > Name: ToolsTests-fbs.62 > Author: fbs > Time: 19 April 2013, 8:43:40.116 am > UUID: 926d563e-d57b-44ec-b4e7-672010293c2b > Ancestors: ToolsTests-nice.61 > > Tests for the new #canonicalArgumentName Debugger methods. > > This is part of test coverage for #canonicalArgumentName, which
is
> implemented > in Object and also has no method timestamp or comment (!!!). > > The canonicalArgumentName method is sent by many unit tests, so
it
has very
> good coverage (even though I don't know the significance of this
failing
> test). > > Aside from unit tests, it is sent by Message>>createStubMethod
and
appears
> to be used when the debugger provides a template for
implementing a
missing
> method, or for implementing a method override. > > The test does this: > > testCollectionsGeneralise > self assert: Collection name equals: Array new
canonicalArgumentName.
> self assert: Collection name equals: OrderedCollection new > canonicalArgumentName. > self assert: Collection name equals: LinkedList new > canonicalArgumentName > > > This looks like a regression that should be fixed such that the
tests pass
> again, and that also deserves a good method comment in > Object>>cononicalArgumentName. > > I think that some more background and explanation can probably be
found on
> squeak-dev circa April 2013, notably this reference: > > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2013- > April/170506.html > > Which points to this: > > Name: Tools-fbs.460 > Author: fbs > Time: 19 April 2013, 8:40:24.143 am > UUID: d5cf82c4-bda7-48ff-bfbd-e8b27d0a07d7 > Ancestors: Tools-fbs.459 > > When creating a stub method, give the argument names that
represent the
> (usual) desired name more accurately. For instance, Arrays, > OrderedCollections > and Sets all result in 'aCollection', ByteStrings and
WideStrings
in
> 'aString', > and so on. > > So perhaps that last paragraph about "when creating a stub
method..."
> might serve > as a method comment for Object>>cononicalArgumentName? > > Dave >
It was part of my work to improve the "JIT development" workflow,
aka
"debugger driven development". See
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2013-
April/170693.html
Thanks Frank,
And kudos for the test coverage, it is the sort of thing that almost certainly would have gone unnoticed otherwise.
Checking what has changed, the following two additions to the image
account for the test failure:
ArrayedCollection>>canonicalArgumentName ==> 'Array' SequenceableCollection>>canonicalArgumentName ==> 'Sequence'
These entered the image here:
Name: Tools-eem.788 Author: eem Time: 6 January 2018, 3:37:50.088654 pm UUID: bb90e476-4cf4-47bd-a8be-bc2785cc8504 Ancestors: Tools-eem.787
Add some more canonicalArgumentName implementations for well-known
Collection subclasses.
So apparently the right thing to do is to update the unit tests to
reflect these additions.
At the risk of contradicting myself yet again,
According to testCollectionsGeneralise, we should have:
The argument prototype for an Array is 'aCollection' The argument prototype for an OrderedCollection is 'aCollection' The argument prototype for a LinkedList is 'aCollection'
However, in trunk we have this:
The argument prototype for an Array is 'anArray' The argument prototype for an OrderedCollection is 'aSequence' The argument prototype for a LinkedList is 'aSequence'
The original behavior as documented in the test seems better to me.
Opinions? Change the test, or revert the changes that lead to the test failure?
Dave
I made the updates in trunk, and testCollectionsGeneralise passes again.
Dave
On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 11:56:34PM -0400, David T. Lewis wrote:
Sorry, yes that is what I meant to say.
Dave
On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 08:04:41PM -0700, Chris Cunningham wrote:
David/Elliot,
I think David means:
Change the test to say this:
self assert: Array name equals: Array new canonicalArgumentName.instead of this:
self assert: Collection name equals: Array newcanonicalArgumentName.
Plus the rest.
On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 6:13 PM, David T. Lewis lewis@mail.msen.com wrote:
That sounds right to me also.
@eliot - do you have a view on this? The fix would involve reverting one of your changes from Tools-eem.788.
Summary: The proposed fix for the DebuggerExtensionsTest>># testCollectionsGeneralise test failure would be:
Change the test to say this:
self assert: Collection name equals: Array newcanonicalArgumentName.
instead of this:
self assert: Collection name equals: Array newcanonicalArgumentName.
- Delete the SequenceableCollection>>canonicalArgumentName that was
added in Tools-eem.788
With those two changes, the test passes and the generated argument names seem reasonable.
Dave
On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 01:48:48AM +0000, Chris Cunningham wrote:
I LIKE Array being anArray but the others being aCollection. But that's just me.
aSequence sound weird to me
Cbc
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018, 18:03 David T. Lewis lewis@mail.msen.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 07:28:03PM -0400, David T. Lewis wrote:
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 02:13:15PM -0700, Frank Shearar wrote: > On 30 April 2018 at 13:23, David T. Lewis lewis@mail.msen.com
wrote:
> > > On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 10:36:17PM -0500, Tim Johnson wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > I ran some tests and found a couple that are failing. I also
checked
> > > and found these tests don't fail in my 5.1 image. > > > > > > BrowserTest>>#testBuildMessageCategoryBrowserEditString > > > DebuggerExtensionsTest>>#testCollectionsGeneralise > > > > > > I think the first one might actually be a case where a bug was
fixed.
> > > The test fails because of a timeout, because there is a dialog
on-screen
> > > which is not returning. Not sure, but the test may be
intended to
> > > declare that the dialog should appear, and now it is (?). > > > > > > The second one, I don't understand. There is no comment. > > > > I don't understand it either, and strangely it has no method
timestamp.
> > But the test was was introduced in April 2013 in this update: > > > > Name: ToolsTests-fbs.62 > > Author: fbs > > Time: 19 April 2013, 8:43:40.116 am > > UUID: 926d563e-d57b-44ec-b4e7-672010293c2b > > Ancestors: ToolsTests-nice.61 > > > > Tests for the new #canonicalArgumentName Debugger methods. > > > > This is part of test coverage for #canonicalArgumentName, which
is
> > implemented > > in Object and also has no method timestamp or comment (!!!). > > > > The canonicalArgumentName method is sent by many unit tests, so
it
has very
> > good coverage (even though I don't know the significance of this
failing
> > test). > > > > Aside from unit tests, it is sent by Message>>createStubMethod
and
appears
> > to be used when the debugger provides a template for
implementing a
missing
> > method, or for implementing a method override. > > > > The test does this: > > > > testCollectionsGeneralise > > self assert: Collection name equals: Array new
canonicalArgumentName.
> > self assert: Collection name equals: OrderedCollection new > > canonicalArgumentName. > > self assert: Collection name equals: LinkedList new > > canonicalArgumentName > > > > > > This looks like a regression that should be fixed such that the
tests pass
> > again, and that also deserves a good method comment in > > Object>>cononicalArgumentName. > > > > I think that some more background and explanation can probably be
found on
> > squeak-dev circa April 2013, notably this reference: > > > > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2013- > > April/170506.html > > > > Which points to this: > > > > Name: Tools-fbs.460 > > Author: fbs > > Time: 19 April 2013, 8:40:24.143 am > > UUID: d5cf82c4-bda7-48ff-bfbd-e8b27d0a07d7 > > Ancestors: Tools-fbs.459 > > > > When creating a stub method, give the argument names that
represent the
> > (usual) desired name more accurately. For instance, Arrays, > > OrderedCollections > > and Sets all result in 'aCollection', ByteStrings and
WideStrings
in
> > 'aString', > > and so on. > > > > So perhaps that last paragraph about "when creating a stub
method..."
> > might serve > > as a method comment for Object>>cononicalArgumentName? > > > > Dave > > > > It was part of my work to improve the "JIT development" workflow,
aka
> "debugger driven development". See >
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2013-
April/170693.html
> and http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=7761 >
Thanks Frank,
And kudos for the test coverage, it is the sort of thing that almost certainly would have gone unnoticed otherwise.
Checking what has changed, the following two additions to the image
account for the test failure:
ArrayedCollection>>canonicalArgumentName ==> 'Array' SequenceableCollection>>canonicalArgumentName ==> 'Sequence'
These entered the image here:
Name: Tools-eem.788 Author: eem Time: 6 January 2018, 3:37:50.088654 pm UUID: bb90e476-4cf4-47bd-a8be-bc2785cc8504 Ancestors: Tools-eem.787
Add some more canonicalArgumentName implementations for well-known
Collection subclasses.
So apparently the right thing to do is to update the unit tests to
reflect these additions.
At the risk of contradicting myself yet again,
According to testCollectionsGeneralise, we should have:
The argument prototype for an Array is 'aCollection' The argument prototype for an OrderedCollection is 'aCollection' The argument prototype for a LinkedList is 'aCollection'
However, in trunk we have this:
The argument prototype for an Array is 'anArray' The argument prototype for an OrderedCollection is 'aSequence' The argument prototype for a LinkedList is 'aSequence'
The original behavior as documented in the test seems better to me.
Opinions? Change the test, or revert the changes that lead to the test failure?
Dave
Hi David,
sorry, I missed this thread.
On May 1, 2018, at 6:13 PM, David T. Lewis lewis@mail.msen.com wrote:
That sounds right to me also.
@eliot - do you have a view on this? The fix would involve reverting one of your changes from Tools-eem.788.
I like the name suggestions being as specific as is reading noble and I think anArray is likely a better suggestion than aSequence in most cases where an array is supplied, so my learning would be to change the test.
Summary: The proposed fix for the DebuggerExtensionsTest>>#testCollectionsGeneralise test failure would be:
Change the test to say this:
self assert: Collection name equals: Array new canonicalArgumentName.
instead of this:
self assert: Collection name equals: Array new canonicalArgumentName.
- Delete the SequenceableCollection>>canonicalArgumentName that was added in Tools-eem.788
With those two changes, the test passes and the generated argument names seem reasonable.
This is the tail wagging the dog. The test should be changed, not the better suggestion discarded. IMO.
Dave
On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 01:48:48AM +0000, Chris Cunningham wrote: I LIKE Array being anArray but the others being aCollection. But that's just me.
aSequence sound weird to me
Cbc
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018, 18:03 David T. Lewis lewis@mail.msen.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 07:28:03PM -0400, David T. Lewis wrote:
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 02:13:15PM -0700, Frank Shearar wrote:
On 30 April 2018 at 13:23, David T. Lewis lewis@mail.msen.com wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 10:36:17PM -0500, Tim Johnson wrote: > Hi, > > I ran some tests and found a couple that are failing. I also
checked
> and found these tests don't fail in my 5.1 image. > > BrowserTest>>#testBuildMessageCategoryBrowserEditString > DebuggerExtensionsTest>>#testCollectionsGeneralise > > I think the first one might actually be a case where a bug was
fixed.
> The test fails because of a timeout, because there is a dialog
on-screen
> which is not returning. Not sure, but the test may be intended to > declare that the dialog should appear, and now it is (?). > > The second one, I don't understand. There is no comment.
I don't understand it either, and strangely it has no method
timestamp.
But the test was was introduced in April 2013 in this update:
Name: ToolsTests-fbs.62 Author: fbs Time: 19 April 2013, 8:43:40.116 am UUID: 926d563e-d57b-44ec-b4e7-672010293c2b Ancestors: ToolsTests-nice.61
Tests for the new #canonicalArgumentName Debugger methods.
This is part of test coverage for #canonicalArgumentName, which is implemented in Object and also has no method timestamp or comment (!!!).
The canonicalArgumentName method is sent by many unit tests, so it
has very
good coverage (even though I don't know the significance of this
failing
test).
Aside from unit tests, it is sent by Message>>createStubMethod and
appears
to be used when the debugger provides a template for implementing a
missing
method, or for implementing a method override.
The test does this:
testCollectionsGeneralise self assert: Collection name equals: Array new
canonicalArgumentName.
self assert: Collection name equals: OrderedCollection newcanonicalArgumentName. self assert: Collection name equals: LinkedList new canonicalArgumentName
This looks like a regression that should be fixed such that the
tests pass
again, and that also deserves a good method comment in Object>>cononicalArgumentName.
I think that some more background and explanation can probably be
found on
squeak-dev circa April 2013, notably this reference:
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2013- April/170506.html
Which points to this:
Name: Tools-fbs.460 Author: fbs Time: 19 April 2013, 8:40:24.143 am UUID: d5cf82c4-bda7-48ff-bfbd-e8b27d0a07d7 Ancestors: Tools-fbs.459
When creating a stub method, give the argument names that
represent the
(usual) desired name more accurately. For instance, Arrays, OrderedCollections and Sets all result in 'aCollection', ByteStrings and WideStrings
in
'aString', and so on.
So perhaps that last paragraph about "when creating a stub method..." might serve as a method comment for Object>>cononicalArgumentName?
Dave
It was part of my work to improve the "JIT development" workflow, aka "debugger driven development". See
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2013-April/170693.htm...
Thanks Frank,
And kudos for the test coverage, it is the sort of thing that almost certainly would have gone unnoticed otherwise.
Checking what has changed, the following two additions to the image
account for the test failure:
ArrayedCollection>>canonicalArgumentName ==> 'Array' SequenceableCollection>>canonicalArgumentName ==> 'Sequence'
These entered the image here:
Name: Tools-eem.788 Author: eem Time: 6 January 2018, 3:37:50.088654 pm UUID: bb90e476-4cf4-47bd-a8be-bc2785cc8504 Ancestors: Tools-eem.787
Add some more canonicalArgumentName implementations for well-known
Collection subclasses.
So apparently the right thing to do is to update the unit tests to
reflect these additions.
At the risk of contradicting myself yet again,
According to testCollectionsGeneralise, we should have:
The argument prototype for an Array is 'aCollection' The argument prototype for an OrderedCollection is 'aCollection' The argument prototype for a LinkedList is 'aCollection'
However, in trunk we have this:
The argument prototype for an Array is 'anArray' The argument prototype for an OrderedCollection is 'aSequence' The argument prototype for a LinkedList is 'aSequence'
The original behavior as documented in the test seems better to me.
Opinions? Change the test, or revert the changes that lead to the test failure?
Dave
and of course this is all my fault. I should have checked and changed the test myself when I committed Tools-eem.788. I apologise.
_,,,^..^,,,_ (phone)
On May 5, 2018, at 1:14 PM, Eliot Miranda eliot.miranda@gmail.com wrote:
Hi David,
sorry, I missed this thread.
On May 1, 2018, at 6:13 PM, David T. Lewis lewis@mail.msen.com wrote:
That sounds right to me also.
@eliot - do you have a view on this? The fix would involve reverting one of your changes from Tools-eem.788.
I like the name suggestions being as specific as is reading noble and I think anArray is likely a better suggestion than aSequence in most cases where an array is supplied, so my learning would be to change the test.
Summary: The proposed fix for the DebuggerExtensionsTest>>#testCollectionsGeneralise test failure would be:
- Change the test to say this:
self assert: Collection name equals: Array new canonicalArgumentName.
instead of this:
self assert: Collection name equals: Array new canonicalArgumentName.
- Delete the SequenceableCollection>>canonicalArgumentName that was added in Tools-eem.788
With those two changes, the test passes and the generated argument names seem reasonable.
This is the tail wagging the dog. The test should be changed, not the better suggestion discarded. IMO.
Dave
On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 01:48:48AM +0000, Chris Cunningham wrote: I LIKE Array being anArray but the others being aCollection. But that's just me.
aSequence sound weird to me
Cbc
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018, 18:03 David T. Lewis lewis@mail.msen.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 07:28:03PM -0400, David T. Lewis wrote: > On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 02:13:15PM -0700, Frank Shearar wrote: >> On 30 April 2018 at 13:23, David T. Lewis lewis@mail.msen.com wrote: >> >> On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 10:36:17PM -0500, Tim Johnson wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I ran some tests and found a couple that are failing. I also
checked
>> and found these tests don't fail in my 5.1 image. >> >> BrowserTest>>#testBuildMessageCategoryBrowserEditString >> DebuggerExtensionsTest>>#testCollectionsGeneralise >> >> I think the first one might actually be a case where a bug was
fixed.
>> The test fails because of a timeout, because there is a dialog
on-screen
>> which is not returning. Not sure, but the test may be intended to >> declare that the dialog should appear, and now it is (?). >> >> The second one, I don't understand. There is no comment. > > I don't understand it either, and strangely it has no method
timestamp.
> But the test was was introduced in April 2013 in this update: > > Name: ToolsTests-fbs.62 > Author: fbs > Time: 19 April 2013, 8:43:40.116 am > UUID: 926d563e-d57b-44ec-b4e7-672010293c2b > Ancestors: ToolsTests-nice.61 > > Tests for the new #canonicalArgumentName Debugger methods. > > This is part of test coverage for #canonicalArgumentName, which is > implemented > in Object and also has no method timestamp or comment (!!!). > > The canonicalArgumentName method is sent by many unit tests, so it
has very
> good coverage (even though I don't know the significance of this
failing
> test). > > Aside from unit tests, it is sent by Message>>createStubMethod and
appears
> to be used when the debugger provides a template for implementing a
missing
> method, or for implementing a method override. > > The test does this: > > testCollectionsGeneralise > self assert: Collection name equals: Array new
canonicalArgumentName.
> self assert: Collection name equals: OrderedCollection new > canonicalArgumentName. > self assert: Collection name equals: LinkedList new > canonicalArgumentName > > > This looks like a regression that should be fixed such that the
tests pass
> again, and that also deserves a good method comment in > Object>>cononicalArgumentName. > > I think that some more background and explanation can probably be
found on
> squeak-dev circa April 2013, notably this reference: > > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2013- > April/170506.html > > Which points to this: > > Name: Tools-fbs.460 > Author: fbs > Time: 19 April 2013, 8:40:24.143 am > UUID: d5cf82c4-bda7-48ff-bfbd-e8b27d0a07d7 > Ancestors: Tools-fbs.459 > > When creating a stub method, give the argument names that
represent the
> (usual) desired name more accurately. For instance, Arrays, > OrderedCollections > and Sets all result in 'aCollection', ByteStrings and WideStrings
in
> 'aString', > and so on. > > So perhaps that last paragraph about "when creating a stub method..." > might serve > as a method comment for Object>>cononicalArgumentName? > > Dave >
It was part of my work to improve the "JIT development" workflow, aka "debugger driven development". See
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2013-April/170693.htm...
Thanks Frank,
And kudos for the test coverage, it is the sort of thing that almost certainly would have gone unnoticed otherwise.
Checking what has changed, the following two additions to the image
account for the test failure:
ArrayedCollection>>canonicalArgumentName ==> 'Array' SequenceableCollection>>canonicalArgumentName ==> 'Sequence'
These entered the image here:
Name: Tools-eem.788 Author: eem Time: 6 January 2018, 3:37:50.088654 pm UUID: bb90e476-4cf4-47bd-a8be-bc2785cc8504 Ancestors: Tools-eem.787
Add some more canonicalArgumentName implementations for well-known
Collection subclasses.
So apparently the right thing to do is to update the unit tests to
reflect these additions.
At the risk of contradicting myself yet again,
According to testCollectionsGeneralise, we should have:
The argument prototype for an Array is 'aCollection' The argument prototype for an OrderedCollection is 'aCollection' The argument prototype for a LinkedList is 'aCollection'
However, in trunk we have this:
The argument prototype for an Array is 'anArray' The argument prototype for an OrderedCollection is 'aSequence' The argument prototype for a LinkedList is 'aSequence'
The original behavior as documented in the test seems better to me.
Opinions? Change the test, or revert the changes that lead to the test failure?
Dave
squeak-dev@lists.squeakfoundation.org
-
Chris Cunningham -
David T. Lewis -
Eliot Miranda -
Frank Shearar -
Tim Johnson