Continue to Improve Testing for GlassBR

[niazim3]

This issue is a continuation of JacquesCarette/Drasil#347.

testInterp.py

Broken as Implementation module has no attributes find_bound and interp and x1 is not defined (mentioned in comments of this commit).

testReadTable.py

Broken, as mentioned in the comments of this commit.

testMainFun.py

Has 1 failure upon running make test:

Please update TestingPythonGlassBR.tex and TestingPythonGlassBR.pdf as deemed necessary.

[niazim3]

Note: interp.py in Python subfolder defines

def lin_interp(y1, y2, x1, x2, input_param):
...

def proper_index(index1,index2,data,value):
... 

# find_bounds: numpy.ndarray numpy.ndarray Num Num -> Int Int Int Int Int
def find_bounds(data1, data2, value1, value2):
...

# interp: Int Int Int Int Int Int numpy.ndarray numpy.ndarray numpy.ndarray Num Num -> Num
def interp(idx, jdx, kdx, num_interp1, num_interp2, data1, data2, data3, value1, value2):
...

was simplified to
interp.py in Python_Simplified subfolder, which defines

class BoundError(Exception):
...

def lin_interp(x1, y1, x2, y2, x):
...

# arr => Sj (i.e. sequence of numbers representing possible standOff distances)
# v   => SD calculated (i.e. number)
def indInSeq(arr, v):
...

def matrixCol(mat, c):
...
    
def interpY(x_array, y_array, z_array, x, z):
...
        
def interpZ(x_array, y_array, z_array, x, y):
...

[niazim3]

Note to self for cleanup of infrastructure (WIP)

• For INTERPOLATION TESTING, /Test contains testInterp.py which is a file that parameterizes the hard coded inputs in the /OldTests testInterp{#}.py (# = '' to 14); all the comments from these files were input under the column heading of "Significant inputs" in table 5 of the TestingPythonGlassBR.pdf
  (which means the files in /OldTests can be removed after

• ensuring the comments in the documentation pdf is correct

• inputs in interp.txt were copied over correctly)

• For INTERPOLATION IMPLEMENTATION, as mentioned in Test Documentation for GlassBR JacquesCarette/Drasil#262, Python_Simplified contains the "improved" from Python and that "The code is correct, it is the tests that are not.", which means new/updated test cases are required for the functions matrixCol(mat, c), interpY(x_array, y_array, z_array, x, z), and interpZ(x_array, y_array, z_array, x, y) (as they're replacing find_bounds(data1, data2, value1, value2) and interp(idx, jdx, kdx, num_interp1, num_interp2, data1, data2, data3, value1, value2))

• For READTABLE TESTING, currently broken due to the following error showing up upon running make test :

AttributeError: 'bool' object has no attribute 'all'

, which is related to the implementation

• For READTABLE IMPLEMENTATION, 3 functions (read_z_array(filename), read_x_array(filename, length), read_y_array(filename, length)) in the Python_Simplified version of readTable.py have been introduced to replace Python's version (which only contained read_table(filename)).

• MAINFUN IMPLEMENTATION differences between Python and Python_Simplified versions : https://www.diffchecker.com/U73K51SG

• MAINFUN TESTING is improved in /Test since it has all the necessary files for input and output (which were the only discrepancies between the testMain{#}.py files in /OldTests) in main.txt; seems to be breaking in relation to interp

[smiths]

@niazim3, please feel free to improve the test code and documentation as you see fit. The eventual goal is to write something that you wish you had found when you first looked at the test code. 😄 In writing the new test documentation and test code, please change the current names to more meaningful names. testTable1 and testTable2 do not tell us anything. It is also good if the test case summaries do not needlessly repeat information. If many test cases share inputs, then we should only summarize these inputs once, and simply distinguish each test case by how it is different from the others. I made a similar comment for:

JacquesCarette/Drasil#330

Perhaps you and @elwazana should discuss the best way to document the test cases? Our goal is something that makes sense to humans, but that we can also imagine generating from the knowledge in Drasil.

[niazim3]

As of commit 01e1337, testReadTable is no longer causing failures or errors. However, the test definitions use numbers that seem to come out of nowhere when looking at just the code. Either

• upon documenting the tests we'll be able to determine why these particular numbers are used, or
• read_x_array or read_y_array will be updated to use the length input parameters to produce these number lists (will still need to determine semantics of such a list)

For now, just going to point out that these numbers are the first length number of items in the lists produced of the first length+1 lines that are returned from the functions. E.g. for

caseStudies/CaseStudies/glass/Implementations/Python/Test/testReadTable.py

Lines 40 to 45 in 01e1337

	def test_read_x_array(self):
	self.assertTrue((self.array1[0] == np.array([[6.143397364345, 6.128184215473, 6.344639409554, 7.199850837298],
	[6.158648279689, 6.158648279689, 6.344639409554, 7.21772438659],
	[6.189263785047, 6.189263785047, 6.376179502933, 7.253604707984],
	[6.189263785047, 6.189263785047, 6.407876386546, 7.271611700659],
	[6.204628563268, 6.22003148438, 6.407876386546, 7.289663395493]])).all())

, where the read_x_array('TSD.txt', len(w_array)) call produced the following list (partial list of the approximately 500 lines produced):

[niazim3]

Not sure why these weren't coming up earlier, but printing (self.errorMsg[i]) + " is " + context.exception.args[0]) in test_check_constraints leads to the following code snippet. We need to look through the input files to ensure different types of invalid inputs are being entered (which can be done systematically after test cases are documented following #80).

InputError: a and b must be greater than 0 is InputError: a and b must be greater than 0
InputError: a and b must be greater than 0 is InputError: a and b must be greater than 0
InputError: a/b must be between 1 and 5 is InputError: a/b must be between 1 and 5
InputError: a/b must be between 1 and 5 is InputError: a/b must be between 1 and 5
InputError: t must be in [2.5,2.7,3.0,4.0,5.0,6.0,8.0,10.0,12.0,16.0,19.0,22.0] is InputError: a/b must be between 1 and 5
InputError: wtnt must be between 4.5 and 910 is InputError: a/b must be between 1 and 5
InputError: wtnt must be between 4.5 and 910 is InputError: a/b must be between 1 and 5
InputError: TNT must be greater than 0 is InputError: a/b must be between 1 and 5
InputError: SD must be between 6 and 130 is InputError: a/b must be between 1 and 5
InputError: SD must be between 6 and 130 is InputError: a/b must be between 1 and 5
InputError: a and b must be greater than 0 is InputError: a and b must be greater than 0
InputError: a and b must be greater than 0 is InputError: a and b must be greater than 0
InputError: TNT must be greater than 0 is InputError: a/b must be between 1 and 5

.

[niazim3]

@smiths Should this issue be closed since #134 is tracking the new code for GlassBR and new tests will be implemented for that implementation?

[smiths]

Yes, I think we should close this issue. Part of my motivation for wanting to redesign GlassBR was the confusion around testing in the previous version. I think things should fit together better with the redesign.