Where communities thrive


  • Join over 1.5M+ people
  • Join over 100K+ communities
  • Free without limits
  • Create your own community
People
Repo info
Activity
  • 19:45

    pmoura on master

    Fix handling of a partial list … Update SVG diagrams Fix typo in type argument of th… (compare)

  • Dec 03 23:08

    pmoura on master

    Improve documentation on using … (compare)

  • Dec 03 20:54
    pmoura commented #121
  • Dec 03 20:49
    ccr185 commented #121
  • Dec 03 20:48
    ccr185 closed #121
  • Dec 03 20:48
    ccr185 commented #121
  • Dec 03 20:41
    pmoura commented #121
  • Dec 03 20:41
    pmoura commented #121
  • Dec 03 19:41
    ccr185 commented #121
  • Dec 03 19:38
    ccr185 commented #121
  • Dec 03 19:37
    ccr185 commented #121
  • Dec 03 19:37
    ccr185 commented #121
  • Dec 03 19:36
    ccr185 commented #121
  • Dec 03 19:36
    ccr185 commented #121
  • Dec 03 19:35
    pmoura commented #121
  • Dec 03 19:35
    ccr185 commented #121
  • Dec 03 19:33
    ccr185 commented #121
  • Dec 03 19:31
    pmoura commented #121
  • Dec 03 19:16
    ccr185 commented #121
  • Dec 03 19:16
    ccr185 commented #121
A Man With A Clever Disguise
@ACleverDisguise
I was trying to be too tricky for my own good by having a root loader that gets modified depending on if I want to debug, test, etc.
I'll just stop trying to be too DRY.
It's not as if these scripts change a lot.
Paulo Moura
@pmoura
Your loader_debug.lgt file can simply do logtalk_load(loader) +set_logtalk_flag(debug,on)` + ... so you would still use a single root loader file and derive from it in a minmal way.
A Man With A Clever Disguise
@ACleverDisguise
OK, we're back to this.
debug is on, manually confirmed.
Not a single print_message in the debug domain got printed.
If I change it to information, they all get printed.
So even manually turning the debug flag on before loading the tester still gives me tests that don't display debug messages.
Paulo Moura
@pmoura
You can use the object_property/2 predicate to check the properties of the object containing those calls.
A Man With A Clever Disguise
@ACleverDisguise
Not sure what I'm checking for? debugging is set, among a host of others that don't seem relevant.
Paulo Moura
@pmoura
Contents of the tester.lgt file?
A Man With A Clever Disguise
@ACleverDisguise
:- initialization((
    set_logtalk_flag(report, warnings),
    logtalk_load(loader),
    logtalk_load(lgtunit(loader)),
    logtalk_load(two3tree, [source_data(on), debug(on)]),
    logtalk_load(tests, [hook(lgtunit)]),
    tests::run
)).
Paulo Moura
@pmoura
And the debug message printing calls are in the two2three file?
A Man With A Clever Disguise
@ACleverDisguise
tests file right now.
I'm trying to nail down a problem in the validation predicates in the tests.
Paulo Moura
@pmoura
Can you paste one of the clauses that contain the print message call?
A Man With A Clever Disguise
@ACleverDisguise

First the uses clause that gives me the message in a convenient format. Currently set to information but if I change it to debug it never prints anything.

    :- uses(logtalk, [print_message(information, two3tree_tests, Message) as dbg(Message)]).

Now a typical clause:

    depth(Din, node(L, _, R), Dout) :-
        depth(L, DL),
        depth(R, DR),
        DL == DR, % if the depths don't match, this is a big problem!
        Dout is  Din + DL,
        dbg(depth-(Dout-node2_descend)).
Paulo Moura
@pmoura
That clause is not calling dbg/1. You meant to paste a different one?
A Man With A Clever Disguise
@ACleverDisguise
So that uses clause works. Messages print. But without changing anything else in the code, and after manually turning the debug flag on and confirming it's on, changing it to debug makes it stop working.
Oh, right. Sorry.
Fixed.
I took a test, not a helper. :)
Paulo Moura
@pmoura
Is the dbg/1 call ever reached?
A Man With A Clever Disguise
@ACleverDisguise
If I switch it to information it displays, so yes.
Paulo Moura
@pmoura
I assume so?
A Man With A Clever Disguise
@ACleverDisguise
% depth: 1-node2_leaf
% depth: 1-node(leaf,10-value10,leaf)
% two3tree_insert_1: success (in 0.0004346110000001957 seconds)
% depth: 1-node3_leaf
% depth: 1-node(leaf,10-value10,leaf,20-value20,leaf)
% two3tree_insert_2: success (in 0.00041456800000005956 seconds)
Test output for a successful test.
Paulo Moura
@pmoura
And if you modify that clause to print the value of the debug flag?
A Man With A Clever Disguise
@ACleverDisguise

OK, so I'll give you two results. Here's the run with dbg/1 using information:

% depth: 1-node2_leaf
% on
% depth: 1-node(leaf,10-value10,leaf)
% two3tree_insert_1: success (in 0.00029869099999979554 seconds)
% depth: 1-node3_leaf
% depth: 1-node(leaf,10-value10,leaf,20-value20,leaf)
% two3tree_insert_2: success (in 0.0002536849999996704 seconds)

And here's the run with dbg/1 using debug on the same test results:

% on
% two3tree_insert_1: success (in 0.00033641100000014745 seconds)
% two3tree_insert_2: success (in 0.00021322999999995318 seconds)
The dbg/1 messages vanish if configured for debug but are visible if configured for information. In both cases the current_logtalk_flag (displayed using print_message/3 using information always) is on.
A Man With A Clever Disguise
@ACleverDisguise
Adding this to the tests object doesn't change anything:
    :- set_logtalk_flag(debug, on).
Paulo Moura
@pmoura
I think I have enough details from you to look into it. Possible tomorrow.
A Man With A Clever Disguise
@ACleverDisguise
It's not critical, just to be clear. I'm fine with using information class. I was just wondering if there was something I was missing.
Paulo Moura
@pmoura
Not clear at this time. Nothing obviously wrong. But I have meetings all day and can't look at it today.
A Man With A Clever Disguise
@ACleverDisguise
By the way, I'd just like to thank you for making lgtunit so civilized.
Most testing frameworks set my teeth on edge and make me avoid writing tests until I have to.
Paulo Moura
@pmoura
:-)
A Man With A Clever Disguise
@ACleverDisguise
lgtunit is a positive joy to work with by comparison.
Paulo Moura
@pmoura
Have you already played with lgtunit QuickCheck implementation?
A Man With A Clever Disguise
@ACleverDisguise
Played, yes. Not integrated into workflow.
Paulo Moura
@pmoura
And with generating Allure test reports?
A Man With A Clever Disguise
@ACleverDisguise
Once I get these 2-3 trees working, I will be using quickcheck tests formally.
And I have no idea what an Allure is, so ... no.
A Man With A Clever Disguise
@ACleverDisguise
Still not really helping since I don't know what an Allure is. To me Allure is a stat in an RPG. :D
Paulo Moura
@pmoura
Follow the bread crumps on that tweet for a demo...
A Man With A Clever Disguise
@ACleverDisguise
% 
% tests started at 2021-09-10, 23:37:45
% 
% running tests from object tests
% file: /home/michael/src/Playthings/Prolog/Logtalk/two3tree/tests.lgt
% 
% two3tree_new: success (in 0.0001542940000001103 seconds)
% two3tree_insert_1: success (in 0.00011241300000008891 seconds)
% two3tree_insert_2: success (in 0.0001055439999997354 seconds)
% two3tree_insert_3: success (in 0.0004157660000001506 seconds)
% two3tree_insert_4: success (in 0.0001568519999999296 seconds)
% two3tree_insert_5: success (in 0.00012946400000002356 seconds)
% two3tree_insert_6: success (in 0.00017247299999967325 seconds)
% two3tree_insert_7: success (in 0.00018493100000016582 seconds)
% 
% 8 tests: 0 skipped, 8 passed, 0 failed (0 flaky)
% completed tests from object tests
% 
% no code coverage information collected
% tests ended at 2021-09-10, 23:37:45
%
Just the kind of report I like to see. :D
Paulo Moura
@pmoura
👍