[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software
Confronta i prezzi di migliaia di prodotti.
Asp Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

comp.lang.ruby

[ANN] heckle 1.2.0 Released

Ryan Davis

2/13/2007 10:43:00 PM

heckle version 1.2.0 has been released!

http://www.rubyforge.org/projects...
by Ryan Davis and Kevin Clark

Heckle is a mutation tester. It modifies your code and runs your
tests to make sure they fail. The idea is that if code can be changed
and your tests don't notice, either that code isn't being covered or
it doesn't do anything.

Changes:

== 1.2.0 / 2007-01-15

* 2 major enhancements:
* Timeout for tests set dynamically and overridable with -T
* Class method support with "self.method_name"
* 3 minor enhancements:
* -b allows heckling of branches only
* Restructured class heirarchy and got rid of Base and others.
* Revamped the tests and reduced size by 60%.
* 1 bug fix:
* Fixed the infinite loop caused by syntax errors

http://www.rubyforge.org/projects...
by Ryan Davis and Kevin Clark
13 Answers

Ryan Davis

2/14/2007 12:28:00 AM

0


On Feb 13, 2007, at 2:43 PM, Ryan Davis wrote:

> heckle version 1.2.0 has been released!

OOPS! I must opened an old email file. 1.3.0 was released today, not
1.2.0.

== 1.3.0 / 2007-02-12

* 1 major enhancement:
* Unified diffs for mutatated methods
* 4 minor enhancements:
* Now returns exit status 1 if failed.
* Added a simple report at the end.
* Runs are now sorted by method.
* Autodetects rails and changes test_pattern accordingly.
* 2 bug fixes:
* Aborts when an unknown method is supplied.
* Escapes slashes in random regexps.

Ryan Davis

2/14/2007 2:39:00 AM

0

OOPS! I must have grabbed the wrong paragraph by mistake. We released
1.3.0 today, not 1.2.0.

== 1.3.0 / 2007-02-12

* 1 major enhancement:
* Unified diffs for mutatated methods
* 4 minor enhancements:
* Now returns exit status 1 if failed.
* Added a simple report at the end.
* Runs are now sorted by method.
* Autodetects rails and changes test_pattern accordingly.
* 2 bug fixes:
* Aborts when an unknown method is supplied.
* Escapes slashes in random regexps.

http://www.rubyforge.org/projects...
by Ryan Davis and Kevin Clark

Daniel Schierbeck

2/14/2007 2:13:00 PM

0

On Wed, 2007-02-14 at 07:43 +0900, Ryan Davis wrote:
> heckle version 1.2.0 has been released!
>
> http://www.rubyforge.org/projects...
> by Ryan Davis and Kevin Clark
>
> Heckle is a mutation tester. It modifies your code and runs your
> tests to make sure they fail. The idea is that if code can be changed
> and your tests don't notice, either that code isn't being covered or
> it doesn't do anything.

Hey Ryan, great stuff! I've just got one question: I'm adding some
methods to Integer, String, etc., and I'm having trouble heckling my
tests - when I do `heckle Integer' for example, it runs though *each*
method on Integer, not just the ones defined by myself. Is there a way
to restrict the scope of the heckling?


Cheers,
Daniel

Jan Friedrich

2/14/2007 2:51:00 PM

0

Daniel Schierbeck schrieb:
> tests - when I do `heckle Integer' for example, it runs though *each*
> method on Integer, not just the ones defined by myself. Is there a way
> to restrict the scope of the heckling?
heckle --help
Usage: heckle class_name [method_name]
[snip]

==> heckle Integer your_method

Regards,
Jan

Daniel Berger

2/14/2007 8:06:00 PM

0

On Feb 13, 7:39 pm, Ryan Davis <r...@zenspider.com> wrote:
> OOPS! I must have grabbed the wrong paragraph by mistake. We released
> 1.3.0 today, not 1.2.0.

<snip>

Solaris 10
Sun Studio Compiler 11

djberge-/export/home/djberge/workspace-550>sudo gem install heckle
Install required dependency hoe? [Yn] Y
Install required dependency rubyforge? [Yn] Y
Successfully installed heckle-1.3.0
Successfully installed hoe-1.2.0
Successfully installed rubyforge-0.4.0

(and later...)

djberge-/export/home/djberge/src/ruby-580>heckle --help
cc: illegal option -Wall
/usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/RubyInline-3.6.2/./inline.rb:408:in
`build': error executing cc -G -xO5 -xipo -xtarget=ultra2e -Wall -W -
Wpointer-arith -Wcast-qual -Wcast-align -Wwrite-strings -Wmissing-
noreturn -Werror -dalign -fns -xbuiltin=%all -xlibmil -xtarget=ultra2e
-xO5 -xipo -I /usr/local/lib/ruby/1.8/sparc-solaris2.10 -o "/export/
home/djberge/.ruby_inline/Inline_ParseTree_a424.so" "/export/home/
djberge/.ruby_inline/Inline_ParseTree_a424.c" : 256 (CompilationError)
Renamed /export/home/djberge/.ruby_inline/Inline_ParseTree_a424.c to /
export/home/djberge/.ruby_inline/Inline_ParseTree_a424.c.bad from /usr/
local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/RubyInline-3.6.2/./inline.rb:628:in
`inline'
from /usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/ParseTree-1.7.0/lib/
parse_tree.rb:214
from /usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rubygems/
custom_require.rb:27:in `gem_original_require'
from /usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rubygems/
custom_require.rb:27:in `require'
from /usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/heckle-1.3.0/bin/../lib/
heckle.rb:2
from /usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rubygems/
custom_require.rb:27:in `gem_original_require'
from /usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rubygems/
custom_require.rb:27:in `require'
from /usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/heckle-1.3.0/bin/../lib/
test_unit_heckler.rb:4
from /usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rubygems/
custom_require.rb:27:in `gem_original_require'
from /usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rubygems/
custom_require.rb:27:in `require'
from /usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/heckle-1.3.0/bin/heckle:
4
from /usr/local/bin/heckle:18:in `load'
from /usr/local/bin/heckle:18

I upgraded to ParseTree 1.7.0 but that didn't seem to help. How do I
make this work with Sun's cc?

Thanks,

Dan

Ryan Davis

2/15/2007 2:06:00 AM

0


On Feb 14, 2007, at 12:10 PM, Daniel Berger wrote:

> On Feb 13, 7:39 pm, Ryan Davis <r...@zenspider.com> wrote:
>> OOPS! I must have grabbed the wrong paragraph by mistake. We released
>> 1.3.0 today, not 1.2.0.
>
> <snip>

Dan... you know better. File a bug.

Ryan Davis

2/15/2007 2:13:00 AM

0


On Feb 14, 2007, at 6:12 AM, Daniel Schierbeck wrote:

> On Wed, 2007-02-14 at 07:43 +0900, Ryan Davis wrote:
>> heckle version 1.2.0 has been released!
>>
>> http://www.rubyforge.org/projects...
>> by Ryan Davis and Kevin Clark
>>
>> Heckle is a mutation tester. It modifies your code and runs your
>> tests to make sure they fail. The idea is that if code can be changed
>> and your tests don't notice, either that code isn't being covered or
>> it doesn't do anything.
>
> Hey Ryan, great stuff! I've just got one question: I'm adding some
> methods to Integer, String, etc., and I'm having trouble heckling my
> tests - when I do `heckle Integer' for example, it runs though *each*
> method on Integer, not just the ones defined by myself. Is there a way
> to restrict the scope of the heckling?

Other than the single method heckling that Jan points out, there is
little I can offer. Because of the way that ruby and ParseTree work,
heckle can't really tell what is extending a class and what isn't.
That is pretty much just how it works internally. We do a good job of
not bothering with the core methods, but YAML and a bunch of other
stuff get layered on through rubygems and such.

I'd suggest either the single method heckling route or moving your
code to a module and heckling that. We can extend heckle's single
method arg in the future to be more convenient. I want a persistent
heckle mode that knows what failed last time.

Daniel Schierbeck

2/15/2007 2:26:00 PM

0

On Thu, 2007-02-15 at 11:12 +0900, Ryan Davis wrote:
> On Feb 14, 2007, at 6:12 AM, Daniel Schierbeck wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 2007-02-14 at 07:43 +0900, Ryan Davis wrote:
> >> heckle version 1.2.0 has been released!
> >>
> >> http://www.rubyforge.org/projects...
> >> by Ryan Davis and Kevin Clark
> >>
> >> Heckle is a mutation tester. It modifies your code and runs your
> >> tests to make sure they fail. The idea is that if code can be changed
> >> and your tests don't notice, either that code isn't being covered or
> >> it doesn't do anything.
> >
> > Hey Ryan, great stuff! I've just got one question: I'm adding some
> > methods to Integer, String, etc., and I'm having trouble heckling my
> > tests - when I do `heckle Integer' for example, it runs though *each*
> > method on Integer, not just the ones defined by myself. Is there a way
> > to restrict the scope of the heckling?
>
> Other than the single method heckling that Jan points out, there is
> little I can offer. Because of the way that ruby and ParseTree work,
> heckle can't really tell what is extending a class and what isn't.
> That is pretty much just how it works internally. We do a good job of
> not bothering with the core methods, but YAML and a bunch of other
> stuff get layered on through rubygems and such.
>
> I'd suggest either the single method heckling route or moving your
> code to a module and heckling that. We can extend heckle's single
> method arg in the future to be more convenient. I want a persistent
> heckle mode that knows what failed last time.

How about, when heckle first runs the tests, recording what methods were
called, and then restricting the heckling to that? RCov should be able
to point out if a method isn't being covered at all, so heckle really
just needs to test the quality of the tests and implementation.


Cheers,
Daniel

mg

1/6/2013 4:31:00 AM

0

On Jan 2, 7:00 am, rumpelstiltskin <rumpelstilts...@x.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 02 Jan 2013 07:30:47 -0500, Josh <u...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >On 1/1/2013 10:37 PM, rumpelstiltskin wrote:
>
> >>     I'm disappointed that the Democrats in the senate "compromised"
> >> or "capitulated" on the $400K level, but I know I'm in the minority
> >> about this issue.
>
> >I use Bernie Sanders and Dennis Kucinich (in his last vote) as the
> >barometers of whether the Democrats gave up too much.  They both voted
> >for the bill.
>
>     Maybe I just don't appreciate enough about it then.  If Sanders
> and Kucinich both voted for it, that says a lot to me in favour of it,
> even if they may have gritted their teeth when they voted.

The fiscal cliff deal added $4 trillion to the deficit according to
the CBO relative to what would have happened if we had gone over the
cliff and stayed there. Based on a more realistic scenario, though, it
cut $600 billion over 10 years, which is really almost peanuts. Obama
starting out asking for $1.6 trillion in tax hikes and wound up
getting about $600 billion, I think.

I think what might have happened with Sanders and Kucinich is that the
Medicare cuts scared the hell out of them, and they figured they
didn't want to risk not getting the money back with future
negotiations. As for me, I never worried about it too much, and
besides, we could still lose that Medicare money with future
negotiations, anyway. How much they worried about the huge Medicare
cuts might have been the difference, though, on how various Democrats
looked at the deal.

The question I ask myself now is whether Obama will get that extra $1
trillion he was looking for in tax hikes, or will future negotiations,
now that revenues have been cut, be all about Medicare and Social
Security (and Medicaid) cuts?

rumpelstiltskin

1/6/2013 6:15:00 AM

0

On Sat, 5 Jan 2013 20:31:07 -0800 (PST), mg <mgkelson@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>On Jan 2, 7:00?am, rumpelstiltskin <rumpelstilts...@x.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 02 Jan 2013 07:30:47 -0500, Josh <u...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> >On 1/1/2013 10:37 PM, rumpelstiltskin wrote:
>>
>> >> ? ? I'm disappointed that the Democrats in the senate "compromised"
>> >> or "capitulated" on the $400K level, but I know I'm in the minority
>> >> about this issue.
>>
>> >I use Bernie Sanders and Dennis Kucinich (in his last vote) as the
>> >barometers of whether the Democrats gave up too much. ?They both voted
>> >for the bill.
>>
>> ? ? Maybe I just don't appreciate enough about it then. ?If Sanders
>> and Kucinich both voted for it, that says a lot to me in favour of it,
>> even if they may have gritted their teeth when they voted.
>
>The fiscal cliff deal added $4 trillion to the deficit according to
>the CBO relative to what would have happened if we had gone over the
>cliff and stayed there. Based on a more realistic scenario, though, it
>cut $600 billion over 10 years, which is really almost peanuts. Obama
>starting out asking for $1.6 trillion in tax hikes and wound up
>getting about $600 billion, I think.
>
>I think what might have happened with Sanders and Kucinich is that the
>Medicare cuts scared the hell out of them, and they figured they
>didn't want to risk not getting the money back with future
>negotiations. As for me, I never worried about it too much, and
>besides, we could still lose that Medicare money with future
>negotiations, anyway. How much they worried about the huge Medicare
>cuts might have been the difference, though, on how various Democrats
>looked at the deal.
>
>The question I ask myself now is whether Obama will get that extra $1
>trillion he was looking for in tax hikes, or will future negotiations,
>now that revenues have been cut, be all about Medicare and Social
>Security (and Medicaid) cuts?
>
>

I keep listening, to Inside Washington and McLaughlin today,
but still, nobody has mentioned cutting the military budget.
I've often said that we (the USA) should surrender to Canada.
I don't think they'd take us, unless they're crazy, but if they
did, maybe they could infuse a little sanity and straighten
things out a bit.