Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Implement validator module #4

Closed
Kn99HN opened this issue Nov 1, 2021 · 2 comments · Fixed by #10
Closed

Implement validator module #4

Kn99HN opened this issue Nov 1, 2021 · 2 comments · Fixed by #10
Assignees
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@Kn99HN
Copy link
Owner

Kn99HN commented Nov 1, 2021

Validator module represent the parsing of validator language:

Validator {
    Process_name: {
       repeat between 1 and n {

      },
      maybe {

      }
   }
}
@Kn99HN Kn99HN added the enhancement New feature or request label Nov 1, 2021
@Kn99HN Kn99HN mentioned this issue Nov 1, 2021
@joyceluyy
Copy link
Collaborator

I think we first need to parse the expectation to a tree, with each defined expectation statement (such as task, send, receive) as the node.
And create check function for each of the expectation statement to return possible number of events it could match in the trace tree from a given node.
Eventually we can create a validation/checker function that takes in both expectation tree and the trace tree, leverage the check functions to find if there is a possible matching path

@Kn99HN
Copy link
Owner Author

Kn99HN commented Nov 2, 2021

I think that's reasonable. The validator module that I define in this issue is only used for parsing from files.

@Kn99HN Kn99HN self-assigned this Nov 3, 2021
@Kn99HN Kn99HN linked a pull request Nov 5, 2021 that will close this issue
@Kn99HN Kn99HN closed this as completed in #10 Nov 7, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants