← Back to context

Comment by vlovich123

21 hours ago

Either your code shouldn’t fail or the apostrophe isn’t a valid case.

In the former, hypothesis and other similar frameworks are deterministic and will replay the failing test on request or remember the failing tests in a file to rerun in the future to catch regressions.

In the latter, you just tell the framework to not generate such values or at least to skip those test cases (better to not generate in terms of testing performance).

I think what they meant is, "won't Hypothesis sometimes fail to generate input with an apostrophe, thus giving you false confidence that your code can handle apostrophes?"

I think the answer to this is, in practice, it will not fail to generate such input. My understanding is that it's pretty good at mutating input to cover a large amount of surface area with as few as possible examples.

  • Hypothesis is pretty good, but it's not magic. There's only so many corner cases it can cover in the 200 (or so) cases per tests it's running by default.

    But by default you also start with a new random seed every time you run the tests, so you can build up more confidence over the older tests and older code, even if you haven't done anything specifically to address this problem.

    Also, even with Hypothesis you can and should still write specific tests or even just specific generators to cover specific classes of corners cases you are worried about in more detail.

    • > But by default you also start with a new random seed every time you run the tests, so you can build up more confidence over the older tests and older code

      Is it common practice to use the same seed and run a ton of tests until you're satisfied it tested it thoroughly?

      Because I think I would prefer that. With non-deterministic tests I would always wonder if it's going to fail randomly after the code is already in production.

      6 replies →