commons-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Sai Zhang (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (MATH-553) Bug in class# org.apache.commons.math.dfp.Dfp / org.apache.commons.math.linear.RealVectorwith reproducible JUnit test
Date Sun, 03 Apr 2011 20:46:05 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MATH-553?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13015209#comment-13015209
] 

Sai Zhang commented on MATH-553:
--------------------------------

Thanks Luc for your detailed explanation. It makes me much clearer on these
cases.

We will carefully consider your suggestion into the design of our tool.

As I mentioned in the post, another feature of this tool is trying to infer
descriptive code
comments to explain failure,  could you please kindly give us some comments
on
such generated comments? like:

//Test passes if var10 is: (double)<0
java.lang.Double var10 = new java.lang.Double(0.0d);

>From the viewpoint of developers, do you think such comment is useful for
debugging?
Particularly, if the automatically-generated test itself is long and does
not have good readability. Can such
comment be used as a good start point of diagnose?  We would like to hear
developers'
voice and feedback on such code enhancement, to decide whether to improve
along
that line. (of course,  you are already very familiar with the code base,
and may identify
the failure cause by simply look at the execution trace and assertions.But
intuitively,
we think such comments might be helpful for junior developers)

Thanks a lot. Really appreciate your reply!





> Bug in class# org.apache.commons.math.dfp.Dfp / org.apache.commons.math.linear.RealVectorwith
reproducible JUnit test
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: MATH-553
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MATH-553
>             Project: Commons Math
>          Issue Type: Bug
>    Affects Versions: 2.2
>         Environment: jdk 1.6
>            Reporter: Sai Zhang
>         Attachments: ApacheMath_Documented_Test.java
>
>
> Hi all:
> I am writing an automated bug finding tool, and using
> Apache Commons Math as an experimental subject
> for evaluation.
> The tool creates executable JUnit tests as well as
> explanatory code comments. I attached one bug-revealing
> test as follows. Could you please kindly check it, to
> see if it is a real bug or not?
> Also, it would be tremendous helpful if you could give
> some feedback and suggestion on the quality of generated code comments?
> From the perspective of developers who are familiar with the code,
> is the automatically-inferred comment useful in understanding
> the generated test? is the comment helpful in bug fixing from the
> perspective of developers?
> Particularly when the automatically-generated tests
> are often long.
> Your suggestion will help us improve the tool.
> Please see attachment for the failed test.
> The comment appears in the form of:
> //Tests pass if .... (it gives some small change to the test which can make the failed
test pass)
> For example:
> //Test passes if var10 is: (double)<0
> java.lang.Double var10 = new java.lang.Double(0.0d);
> means if you change var10 to a double value which is < 0 (e.g., -1d), the failed test
will pass

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

Mime
View raw message