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
The first line of the reference results (= column names) seems to have no influence on the tests. A recent breaking change updated some of the column names in the output. However, the tests do not validate the the first line of the output against the reference results. I came to this conclusion based on this test, where the error (difference between output and reference) in the first line is not detected. As a reminder:
However the format introduced in precice/precice#620 differs from this one. In #168 I started updating the column names correspondingly for a different test case.
What does this mean?
Currently our tests ignore the column names when comparing the output to the reference files. Therefore, we do not see errors in the column names. In the best case this leads to reference results that are inconsistent with our specification, if we forget to update the (e.g. via #168). This is ugly. In the worst case, columns might be totally mixed up and we do not notice it. This is bad.
The first line of the reference results (= column names) seems to have no influence on the tests. A recent breaking change updated some of the column names in the output. However, the tests do not validate the the first line of the output against the reference results. I came to this conclusion based on this test, where the error (difference between output and reference) in the first line is not detected. As a reminder:
The first line of the reference results reads
systemtests/tests/TestCompose_nutils-of.Ubuntu1804/referenceOutput/Nutils/precice-Nutils-iterations.log
Line 1 in 0b61ba3
However the format introduced in precice/precice#620 differs from this one. In #168 I started updating the column names correspondingly for a different test case.
What does this mean?
Currently our tests ignore the column names when comparing the output to the reference files. Therefore, we do not see errors in the column names. In the best case this leads to reference results that are inconsistent with our specification, if we forget to update the (e.g. via #168). This is ugly. In the worst case, columns might be totally mixed up and we do not notice it. This is bad.