Re: how to test by hand (plunit)

On 12/30/2013 10:27 PM, Ross Boylan wrote:
> When my tests don't work sometimes I want to play around with the
> functions and facts being tested.  They seem to be stuck in a unit test
> scope.  Could someone suggest a better workflow?
> 
> Here are some highlights from the test file:
> <ruleTest.plt>
> :- begin_tests('disk rules').
> :- ['rules.pl'].
> 
> 
> born(xm1, when(date(2010, 1, 1), seq(10)), sony, "first fake machine").
> disk(xda, when(date(2010, 1, 1), seq(20)), size(500, m), maxtor, ide, "first fake disk").
> % many more fake facts
> % many tests
> test(rename3, [set(X = [lv(lv1, myvg), lv(lv1, mynewvg)])]) :-
> 	      same_device(lv(lv1, myvg), when(date(2010, 3, 1), seq(50)), X, _).
> 
> 
> :- end_tests('disk rules').
> </ruleTest.plt>
> 
> The predicates defined in rules.pl are not directly accessible; when I
> try to use them it asks me if I want to correct them to the scope of the
> tests.  
> ?- volume_from_event(lv(lv1, myvg), when(date(2010, 3, 1), seq(40)), LV1, W1).
> Correct to: "'plunit_disk rules':volume_from_event(lv(lv1,myvg),when(date(2010,3,1),seq(40)),LV1,W1)"? y
> false.
> 
> I think the result is false because the decision to run the qualified
> predicate does not have access to the facts defined in ruleTest.plt. I
> would like to check using the fake facts of rules.plt, but those seem to
> be inside the scope of the unit tests.

This should work fine.  If the scoping was wrong (which should not be the
case), you would get an existence error.

The `correct' way to run a single test is

	?- run_tests('disk rules':rename3).

See http://www.swi-prolog.org/pldoc/doc_for?object=run_tests/1

	Cheers --- Jan

> If I try to load the rules directly:
> ?- ['rules.pl'].
> ERROR: load_files/2: No permission to load source `/home/ross/disks/rules.pl' (Non-module file already loaded into module plunit_disk rules; trying to load into user)
> 
> I worked around this by doing:
> ?- unload_file('rulesTest.plt').
> true.
> 
> ?- ['rules.pl'].
> % various warnings
> ?- ['fact.pl'].
> % more warnings
> 
> and then testing the rules using the "real" facts in fact.pl.
> 
> I'm hoping there's a better way.
> 
> fact.pl and rules.pl are vanilla prolog without modules.
> 
> Thanks.
> Ross Boylan
> 
> And Happy New Year to all on the western calendar.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> SWI-Prolog mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.iai.uni-bonn.de/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swi-prolog
>