Testing 如何测试“if@generated”的两侧?
考虑一下,我可能有一些生成的函数要测试,如下所示。 下列的 我让它们选择性地生成Testing 如何测试“if@generated”的两侧?,testing,julia,Testing,Julia,考虑一下,我可能有一些生成的函数要测试,如下所示。 下列的 我让它们选择性地生成 # This code is taken directly from Base. # https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/blob/592748adb25301a45bd6edef3ac0a93eed069852/base/namedtuple.jl#L220-L231 # So importing some of the helpers using Base: merge_na
# This code is taken directly from Base.
# https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/blob/592748adb25301a45bd6edef3ac0a93eed069852/base/namedtuple.jl#L220-L231
# So importing some of the helpers
using Base: merge_names, merge_types, sym_in
function my_merge_fail1(a::NamedTuple{an}, b::NamedTuple{bn}) where {an, bn}
if @generated
names = merge_names(an, bn)
types = merge_types(names, a, b)
vals = Any[ :(getfield($(sym_in(n, bn) ? :b : :a), $(QuoteNode(n)))) for n in names ]
:(error("typo1"); NamedTuple{$names,$types}(($(vals...),)) )
else
names = merge_names(an, bn)
types = merge_types(names, typeof(a), typeof(b))
NamedTuple{names,types}(map(n->getfield(sym_in(n, bn) ? b : a, n), names))
end
end
function my_merge_fail2(a::NamedTuple{an}, b::NamedTuple{bn}) where {an, bn}
if @generated
names = merge_names(an, bn)
types = merge_types(names, a, b)
vals = Any[ :(getfield($(sym_in(n, bn) ? :b : :a), $(QuoteNode(n)))) for n in names ]
:(NamedTuple{$names,$types}(($(vals...),)) )
else
error("typo2")
names = merge_names(an, bn)
types = merge_types(names, typeof(a), typeof(b))
NamedTuple{names,types}(map(n->getfield(sym_in(n, bn) ? b : a, n), names))
end
end
现在,我发现我在每一页上都打了一个“错别字”。
我错误地将错误(…)
包含在这两个代码中。
在my\u merge\u fail1
中,我在@generated
分支中创建了mistike,
在未生成的分支中的my\u merge\u fail2
我的测试似乎只有一个分支:
julia> using Test
julia> @test my_merge_fail1((a=1,), (b=2,)) == (a=1, b=2)
Error During Test at REPL[12]:1
Test threw exception
Expression: my_merge_fail1((a = 1,), (b = 2,)) == (a = 1, b = 2)
typo1
Stacktrace:
[1] error(::String) at ./error.jl:33
[2] macro expansion at ./REPL[6]:2 [inlined]
[3] my_merge_fail1(::NamedTuple{(:a,),Tuple{Int64}}, ::NamedTuple{(:b,),Tuple{Int64}}) at ./REPL[6]:2
[4] top-level scope at REPL[12]:1
[5] eval(::Module, ::Any) at ./boot.jl:331
[6] eval_user_input(::Any, ::REPL.REPLBackend) at /usr/local/src/julia/julia-master/usr/share/julia/stdlib/v1.4/REPL/src/REPL.jl:86
[7] macro expansion at /usr/local/src/julia/julia-master/usr/share/julia/stdlib/v1.4/REPL/src/REPL.jl:118 [inlined]
[8] (::REPL.var"#26#27"{REPL.REPLBackend})() at ./task.jl:333
ERROR: There was an error during testing
julia> @test my_merge_fail2((a=1,), (b=2,)) == (a=1, b=2)
Test Passed
如何改进我的测试?一个解决方案是让这两个分支拥有自己的独立功能,您可以直接测试它们,即
using Base: merge_names, merge_types, sym_in
function my_merge_fail(a::NamedTuple{an}, b::NamedTuple{bn}) where {an, bn}
if @generated
:(my_merge_fail_inner_gen(a, b))
else
my_merge_fail_inner(a, b)
end
end
@generated function my_merge_fail_inner_gen(a::NamedTuple{an}, b::NamedTuple{bn}) where {an, bn}
names = merge_names(an, bn)
types = merge_types(names, a, b)
vals = Any[ :(getfield($(sym_in(n, bn) ? :b : :a), $(QuoteNode(n)))) for n in names ]
:(NamedTuple{$names,$types}(($(vals...),)) )
end
function my_merge_fail_inner(a::NamedTuple{an}, b::NamedTuple{bn}) where {an, bn}
error("typo2")
names = merge_names(an, bn)
types = merge_types(names, typeof(a), typeof(b))
NamedTuple{names,types}(map(n->getfield(sym_in(n, bn) ? b : a, n), names))
end
然后我们像这样运行测试:
julia> using Test
julia> @testset "my_merge_fail" begin
@test my_merge_fail( (a=1,), (b=2,)) == (a=1, b=2)
@test my_merge_fail_inner_gen((a=1,), (b=2,)) == (a=1, b=2)
@test my_merge_fail_inner( (a=1,), (b=2,)) == (a=1, b=2)
end
my_merge_fail: Error During Test at REPL[18]:4
Test threw exception
Expression: my_merge_fail_inner((a = 1,), (b = 2,)) == (a = 1, b = 2)
typo2
Stacktrace:
[1] error(::String) at ./error.jl:33
[2] my_merge_fail_inner(::NamedTuple{(:a,),Tuple{Int64}}, ::NamedTuple{(:b,),Tuple{Int64}}) at ./REPL[8]:2
[3] top-level scope at REPL[18]:4
[4] top-level scope at /Users/mason/julia/usr/share/julia/stdlib/v1.3/Test/src/Test.jl:1107
[5] top-level scope at REPL[18]:2
Test Summary: | Pass Error Total
my_merge_fail | 2 1 3
ERROR: Some tests did not pass: 2 passed, 0 failed, 1 errored, 0 broken.
不过,我不确定的一点是,这种重构是否会对julia用来决定是否使用
@生成的分支的启发式方法产生影响。如果有人知道答案,请发表评论或建议编辑 可以通过从方法中提取降低的代码来实现这一点,您可以指定是为该方法的生成版本还是非生成版本获取代码。这种方法使用eval
和Base.invokeTest
,因此它会有一些开销,但对于测试来说应该是不错的
function _invoke(f, x...; generated)
sig = Core.Typeof(x)
ci = code_lowered(f, sig; generated)[1]
Meta.partially_inline!(
ci.code, [], Tuple{typeof(f),sig.parameters...}, Any[sig.parameters...],
0, 0, :propagate,
)
g = @eval @generated function $(gensym(:g))($([gensym() for _ in x]...))
return $(QuoteNode(ci))
end
Base.invokelatest(g, x...)
end
然后,您可以选择调用方法的生成版本或非生成版本,如下所示:
julia>f(x,y)=@generated()?:x:y
f(带1方法的泛型函数)
julia>\u invoke(f,1,2;generated=true)
1.
julia>\u调用(f,1,2;生成=false)
2.
在运行测试时使用--compile=min
启动Julia-例如,您可以将此标志添加到某些CI服务的测试矩阵中。我想这是一个解决方案。我不喜欢它。我可以在字符串上手动触发解释器吗?看起来这就是我们在Julia本身中测试某些东西的方式:我想知道我们是否应该有某种测试集,专门用于在单独的进程中运行。@MattB。你能回答这个问题吗?