From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,595c75298fbdce96
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,UTF8
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!npeer02.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!post02.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.flashnewsgroups.com-b7.4zTQh5tI3A!not-for-mail
From: Stephen Leake <stephen_leake@stephe-leake.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Is Aunit helpful?
References: 
 <8a1e58c0-2330-4475-8013-97df103dd85e@o19g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>
 	<82r5ids1o9.fsf@stephe-leake.org>
 	<daea94be-eb3a-4984-a6de-0b68225e3139@o19g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>
 	<20100805211820.52c18cb5.tero.koskinen@iki.fi>
 	<8d166cfb-4850-42b6-ac25-d9ac00df7565@q35g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>
 	<op.vhdx2hsoule2fv@garhos> <82ocd5wukf.fsf@stephe-leake.org>
 	<3957496a-af4b-45f5-87c9-327b22d19f08@x21g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>
 	<82eie0vzyd.fsf@stephe-leake.org>
 	<32dc1191-0a83-40ef-8bbc-a13a06f2167e@u26g2000yqu.googlegroups.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2010 03:59:13 -0400
Message-ID: <82iq3bugxa.fsf@stephe-leake.org>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (windows-nt)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:iF8t9pOiM4ZaljeFd36nTjccsxE=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Complaints-To: abuse@flashnewsgroups.com
Organization: FlashNewsgroups.com
X-Trace: de5b74c68efc0e029e66121227
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:13389
Date: 2010-08-16T03:59:13-04:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Midoan <midoan.ses@gmail.com> writes:

>> Midoan <midoan....@gmail.com> writes:
>> > On Aug 14, 6:57 am, Stephen Leake <stephen_le...@stephe-leake.org>
>> > wrote:
>>
>> How can a tool possibly generate expected results? If it reads the code,
>> it can only generate the results that the code _will_ produce. But
>> that's the opposite of a test; the expected results are what the code
>> _should_ produce, based on some other spec (not the Ada spec). A testing
>> process _must_ assume the code is wrong.
>
> Yes of course you are right; and that's what we meant. What we meant
> was that the code's result must always be validated externally of the
> tool. 

Ok, good.

> Mika will simply ask the question "given these inputs, are those
> expected outputs?". 

I suggest you emphasize this point on your website.

If a website describes a tool that claims to "automatically generate
tests", I stop reading, since I know that's a bogus claim.

I would consider a tool that "helps identify all required test cases".

-- 
-- Stephe