Terminology: Logical/Concrete Test Case
还没有人认领这个 Issue。
评估
- 难度
- 4/5
- 预计耗时
- 1-2 天
- 新手友好度
- 48/100
- Issue 类型
- 文档
- 描述清晰度
- 基本清楚
- 活跃度
- 活跃
- 领域
- documentation, testing
调研方向
Start by reading chapter "3. Terminology" in the spec and the discussion referenced in issue #66. Review every use of "logical test case" and "logical run", then update the terminology and Test Case definition so the proposed distinction is consistent throughout the spec.
由索引模型根据 Issue 内容生成。
描述
I'd like to shed light on the term "logical test case".
Preface: Currently the spec in chapter "3. Terminology" does not "define" the term "logical test case".
Problem
IMHO, the term “logical test case” causes confusion when used in conjunction with the parameterization of test cases because it refers to something "abstract". But the opposite is the case.
Why?
- A test case consists of a flow logic plus a set of parameters.
- In case of an non-empty set of parameters the same flow logic is executed multiple times.
- So it can be said that the flow logic is not "complete" and not "concrete" enough.
- So it could also be said that the flow logic actually is the "logical" part of each of the concrete executions.
Proposal
I propose to:
- exchange "logical test case" by "concrete test case" in the spec
- extend the definition of "Test Case" as followed:
Test Case:
An individual executable test, represented in CTRF as an entry within the tests array.
An individual executable test, if parametrized, consists of the flow logic and a set of parameters.
This combination forms a "Concrete Test Case".
This is not yet streamlined, you will probably come up with a better way to phrase it.
Notes:
- By the way , this is not contradictory to "logical run". A "logical run" consists of multiple "concrete runs".
- I felt obliged to mention the term “concrete test case” in my comment to issue #66 because I suspect that the term “logical test case” obscures our understanding of
testId.
- 主要语言
- 没有语言数据
- 星标
- 98
- 派生
- 4
- 平均合并
- 1 小时 21 分钟
- 30 天内合并 PR
- 1
环境准备
- 没有 Dockerfile 或 Docker Compose 文件
- 没有 Pull Request 模板
- 阅读贡献指南
从这里开始
- 先读完整个 Issue，再读项目的贡献指南。
- 在 Issue 下留言说明你要接手 —— 这能避免两个人做同样的事。
- Fork 仓库，在一个分支上完成修改。
- 提交 Pull Request，并在描述里引用这个 Issue 编号。
ctrf-io/ctrf 的其他 Issue
-
难度 1/5 1 小时以内 新手友好度 76/100
-
难度 3/5 半天 新手友好度 32/100
-
难度 5/5 一周以上 新手友好度 35/100
-
难度 5/5 一周以上 新手友好度 30/100
-
难度 5/5 一周以上 新手友好度 35/100
相似的 Issue
-
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 72/100
-
[Docs] README: FAQ setup command, IDA in the intro, Node badge可能已有人在做 @akram1089 今天认领。 未关闭
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 85/100
维护者通常 1 天内回复
-
documentation good first issue
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 72/100
维护者通常 1 天内回复
-
documentation need help question
难度 1/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 66/100
phonology024/babelscribe#26 ·
-
难度 1/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 72/100