[ImageJ-devel] IJ1 unit tests

[Barry DeZonia]

All,

I have updated the tests as Wayne suggested. All of them are now passing.

On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 11:26 AM, Curtis Rueden <ctrueden at wisc.edu> wrote:

> Hi Wayne,
>
>
> I was able to run all the failing tests.
>>
>
> Thanks for investigating. Barry is updating the tests now in response to
> your comments, and will reply with any remaining issues. We should have all
> the tests passing again very soon, and will get them automated soon as well.
>
> Regards,
> Curtis
>
>
>
> On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 6:20 PM, Rasband, Wayne (NIH/NIMH) [E] <
> rasbandw at mail.nih.gov> wrote:
>
>> Hi Curtis & Barry,
>>
>> I was able to run all the failing tests. Thanks for pointing me to the
>> right place on imagejdev website.
>>
>> >1. testDrawPixelsImageProcessor(ij.gui.ArrowTest): expected:<0> but
>> was:<73>
>>
>> ImageJ 1.45 uses a different method for drawing arrows. This change was
>> required to support outlined arrows. Arrows drawn with the new method do not
>> have the exact same pixel layout. I would recommend removing this test.
>>
>> > 2. testFitSplineForStraightening(ij.gui.PolygonRoiTest): array lengths
>> differed, expected.length=4 actual.length=8
>>
>> This test assumes that the number of points in a polygon ROI is the same
>> as the size of the array returned by getXCoordinates(), which is not
>> necessarily the case. It is better to use getPolygon() or getFloatPolygon().
>>
>> > 3. testGetUncalibratedLength(ij.gui.PolygonRoiTest): expected:<1.0> but
>> was:<6.324555320336759>
>>
>> This is a bug in the test. The distance between (1,3) and (5,11) is not
>> 1.0.
>>
>> > 4. testGetConvexHull(ij.gui.ShapeRoiTest)
>>
>> This test assumes that ShapeRoi.getConvexHull() always returns null, which
>> is no longer the case.
>>
>> > 5. testGetFeretValues(ij.gui.ShapeRoiTest): arrays first differed at
>> element [0]; expected:<10.44016> but was:<10.44030650891055>
>>
>> The ShapeRoi.getFeretValues() method in v1.45 calculates the Feret
>> diameter of simple ROIs more accurately. Perhaps this test needs to use a
>> larger tolerance value.
>>
>> > 6. testGetPixels(ij.VirtualStackTest): arrays first differed at element
>> [2]; expected:<0> but was:<120>
>> > 7.    testGetProcessor(ij.VirtualStackTest): arrays first differed at
>> element [2]; expected:<0> but was:<120>
>>
>> The virtual stack tests assume the two images in the virtual stack are 2x3
>> but they are actually 3x2.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> -wayne
>>
>>
>> On Oct 7, 2011, at 3:05 PM, Curtis Rueden wrote:
>>
>> > Hi Wayne et. al,
>> >
>> > For quite some time now, we have had unit tests (written by Barry) for
>> testing the behavior of IJ1. Unfortunately, they were originally written to
>> compile against a patched version of IJ1 and we neglected to update them to
>> work with IJ1 "out of the box."
>> >
>> > I have had a ticket about this situation (
>> http://dev.imagejdev.org/trac/imagej/ticket/598) for the past few months,
>> but have only just now finally fixed the tests to work against various
>> versions of IJ1 from 1.44 onwards.
>> >
>> > I ran them against all development versions of 1.45 (a through q) and
>> saved the result as a blog post:
>> >   http://imagejdev.org/2011/10/07/unit-tests-imagej-1x
>> >
>> > It looks like from 1.45a through 1.45q, a total of 7 code changes were
>> introduced that result in test failures. These could be the result of
>> bugfixes, or they could be new regressions. I wanted to let you know in case
>> you were interested in pursuing these bugs, since I know how much you value
>> backwards compatibility.
>> >
>> > Instructions on running the tests yourself can be found here:
>> >   http://imagejdev.org/source-code#Running_ImageJ_1.x_unit_tests
>> >
>> > My plan is to hook up the tests to Hudson (
>> http://dev.imagejdev.org:8080/) and have it send an email whenever a new
>> version of IJ1 is released with failing tests.
>> >
>> > What do you think?
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Curtis
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://imagej.net/pipermail/imagej-devel/attachments/20111010/e8fd2c25/attachment.html>