Issue #12367 testCaseTransformFunctionWithIntResults test fix

[aditya0811]

flaky test fix Issue #12367

[aditya0811]

build was failing during checkstyle violation, fixed it

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 62.17%. Comparing base (59551e4) to head (e5ad786).
Report is 375 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##             master   #12922      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     61.75%   62.17%   +0.42%     
+ Complexity      207      198       -9     
============================================
  Files          2436     2502      +66     
  Lines        133233   136670    +3437     
  Branches      20636    21164     +528     
============================================
+ Hits          82274    84977    +2703     
- Misses        44911    45410     +499     
- Partials       6048     6283     +235     

Flag	Coverage Δ
custom-integration1	<0.01% <ø> (-0.01%)	⬇️
integration	<0.01% <ø> (-0.01%)	⬇️
integration1	<0.01% <ø> (-0.01%)	⬇️
integration2	0.00% <ø> (ø)
java-11	62.13% <ø> (+0.42%)	⬆️
java-21	62.06% <ø> (+0.43%)	⬆️
skip-bytebuffers-false	62.15% <ø> (+0.41%)	⬆️
skip-bytebuffers-true	62.02% <ø> (+34.29%)	⬆️
temurin	62.17% <ø> (+0.42%)	⬆️
unittests	62.17% <ø> (+0.42%)	⬆️
unittests1	46.74% <ø> (-0.15%)	⬇️
unittests2	27.93% <ø> (+0.20%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[Jackie-Jiang]

Thanks for the fix! Can you also add a special test which will fail if the cast doesn't exist?

[aditya0811]

Thanks for the fix! Can you also add a special test which will fail if the cast doesn't exist?

sure

[aditya0811]

Thanks for the fix! Can you also add a special test which will fail if the cast doesn't exist?

Created a separate projectionBlock object to hold such float value, so as to not interfere with variables in the parent class.

[aditya0811]

Hello @Jackie-Jiang, please let me know your thoughts on the newly added negative scenario test.

[Jackie-Jiang]

There should be an easier way to test this behavior without creating a new segment:
We can loop over the random float values from _floatSVValues and pick a value that is floatValue != (float) Double.parseDouble(Float.toString(floatValue))

[aditya0811]

There should be an easier way to test this behavior without creating a new segment: We can loop over the random float values from _floatSVValues and pick a value that is floatValue != (float) Double.parseDouble(Float.toString(floatValue))

Shouldn't something like 0.1f satisfy this condition?

[Jackie-Jiang]

(double) 0.1f != 0.1, but 0.1f = (float) 0.1. I don't remember which way we do the conversion. Can you try it out and see if it breaks with 0.1?

[aditya0811]

The new test case in PR has 0.1f, which breaks the existing test, however doesn't satisfy floatValue != (float) Double.parseDouble(Float.toString(floatValue)).

We compare float(_leftStorageType) with double(_rightStorageType). For _leftStorageType, with implicit cast, the float value=0.1f is converted to (double) value = 0.10000000149011612. For _rightStorageType, we parse it as double value= 0.1d.

[aditya0811]

We can use following which breaks for 0.1f and pass by using CAST.

Double.compare(_floatSVValues[i], Double.parseDouble(String.format("%f", _floatSVValues[i])))!=0