You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Following #4171, this is the other half of what the test audit turned up: tests that duplicate a sibling already covering the same ground, usually more strictly. The clearest case is libmlx, where several modules grew a tests/ mirror alongside their inline #[cfg(test)] module and the inline one is consistently the stronger of the pair.
What this involves
Delete only tests whose coverage is provably held by a surviving sibling. Every removal names the test that still covers it -- the PR description is that mapping, and it's what makes a deletion this size reviewable at all.
Hold the line at high confidence. There's a second tier of maybe-redundant tests I'm deliberately leaving out of this one; those want a per-cluster judgment call rather than a sweep.
Re-verify every candidate against current main before removing it. The audit predates Fix Tests That Assert The Wrong Thing #4171, and at least one of its targets is already obsolete -- that PR turned the tests in question into real coverage, so deleting them now would lose something.
The gate is a function-level coverage A/B against main: production coverage has to come out flat. Plain line coverage is worse than useless here, since deleting test lines makes the percentage rise on its own.
Cluster-by-cluster detail lives in the project ledger.
Following #4171, this is the other half of what the test audit turned up: tests that duplicate a sibling already covering the same ground, usually more strictly. The clearest case is
libmlx, where several modules grew atests/mirror alongside their inline#[cfg(test)]module and the inline one is consistently the stronger of the pair.What this involves
mainbefore removing it. The audit predates Fix Tests That Assert The Wrong Thing #4171, and at least one of its targets is already obsolete -- that PR turned the tests in question into real coverage, so deleting them now would lose something.main: production coverage has to come out flat. Plain line coverage is worse than useless here, since deleting test lines makes the percentage rise on its own.Cluster-by-cluster detail lives in the project ledger.
Part of #3914.