Fix prototype issue with non-normalised, but structurally empty merging trees #562
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
mheinzel
requested review from
dcoutts,
jorisdral,
recursion-ninja and
wenkokke
as code owners
mheinzel
changed the title
Also moves the expectCompletedMergingTree check into the invariant. This currently does not change any behaviour, but once we call treeInvariant elsewhere, this will now include expectCompleted...
This does not find any issues (or help find the #550 one), but is a reasonable expectation.
This reliably finds the bug mentioned in #550, at the cost of some boilerplate code.
This fixes bug #550
This makes it easier to propagate the error information, for example to report it as a quickcheck property failure with relevant context.
mheinzel
force-pushed
the
mheinzel/prototype-fail
branch
from
0dcd56d to
5780ab4
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
Best reviewed commit by commit.
Fixes #550. Also does some refactoring. The new test catches the issue reliably, but requires a lot of boilerplate, with the definition of a new type. It might be possible to reduce that somewhat, e.g. by unifying the
MTreeandTdatatype, but it's not clear that's worthwhile.The final commit was part of an attempt to improve the situation, but currently is not really needed. It might still be a good direction to go in, allowing to handle invariant violations in a pure manner, instead of through exceptions. Should I keep it?