[yt-dev] A plea for failing tests
Brian O'Shea
bwoshea at gmail.com
Fri Nov 21 13:56:36 PST 2014
This is a great idea, and I'd be happy to help out. Which analysis modules
need tests?
On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Cameron Hummels <chummels at gmail.com> wrote:
> It will at least provide a reminder (each time we run the tests) to all of
> us what needs to be fixed before the full conversion of the code from 2.x
> to 3.0 is complete. These tests should be relatively straightforward, in
> that all we're really doing is just "running the code" for these analysis
> modules. I'm going to try my hand at a few of them, and if others want to
> jump in on ones they are comfortable with, that would be awesome.
>
> Cameron
>
> On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 2:33 PM, Matthew Turk <matthewturk at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Cameron and I were chatting, and it looks like only 5/19 of the
>> analysis modules have tests. I think it would be really valuable to
>> have tests -- even failing ones -- so that we can start finishing the
>> job of porting to yt-3.0 all of the analysis modules.
>>
>> So what do you think -- should we start writing some tests designed to
>> fail?
>>
>> -Matt
>> _______________________________________________
>> yt-dev mailing list
>> yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
>> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Cameron Hummels
> Postdoctoral Researcher
> Steward Observatory
> University of Arizona
> http://chummels.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> yt-dev mailing list
> yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.spacepope.org/pipermail/yt-dev-spacepope.org/attachments/20141121/724b92c3/attachment.htm>
More information about the yt-dev
mailing list