140 testing mechanism #188

pseewald · 2025-11-09T21:41:56Z

I finally found time to wrap up refactoring of the testing mechanism, so that it's better maintainable and so that results are more transparent. The new mechanism is documented in README.md. This fixes #44, fixes #140 and fixes #134.

coveralls · 2025-11-09T21:46:58Z

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 19594268342

Details

474 of 484 (97.93%) changed or added relevant lines in 4 files are covered.
21 unchanged lines in 3 files lost coverage.
Overall coverage increased (+4.6%) to 96.521%

Changes Missing Coverage	Covered Lines	Changed/Added Lines	%
fprettify/init.py	88	90	97.78%
fprettify/tests/fortrantests.py	141	149	94.63%

Files with Coverage Reduction	New Missed Lines	%
fprettify/init.py	2	97.94%
fprettify/version.py	6	0.0%
fprettify/_version.py	13	0.0%

Totals
Change from base Build 10803218841:	4.6%
Covered Lines:	1526
Relevant Lines:	1581

💛 - Coveralls

run_tests.py

dbroemmel · 2025-11-11T14:36:42Z

README.md

+1. one or more unit tests are added which test formatting of small Fortran code
+   snippets, covering all relevant aspects of the added features.
+2. if the changes lead to failures of existing tests, these test failures
+   should be carefully examinated. Only if the test failures are due to


'examinated' -> 'examined'

dbroemmel · 2025-11-11T14:41:07Z

README.md

+        in = "Some Fortran code"
+        out = "Same Fortran code after fprettify formatting"
+
+        # seleced fprettify command line arguments, as documented in "fprettify.py -h":


'seleced' -> 'selected'

examples/out/example_swapcase.f90

max-models

I couldn't find any breaking errors. Here and there I saw some points on the python code style which I would have done differently, but I don't think it's worth quibbling over. The PR looks good to me now :)

max-models · 2025-11-11T22:29:35Z

fprettify/tests/fortrantests.py

+        output.
+        """
+        if cls.n_parsefail + cls.n_internalfail > 0:
+            format = "{:<20}{:<6}"


You are overwriting the built-in function format() with a local variable named format, maybe it would be better if you renamed the variable to fmt or format_string or so.

max-models · 2025-11-21T13:38:52Z

Is there anything more that needs to be done before merging this? It looks good to me!

pseewald · 2025-11-21T18:38:01Z

Is there anything more that needs to be done before merging this? It looks good to me!

Thanks a lot for your timely review. I checked the changes again myself, and I haven't found anything which would need rework, so I'm going to merge it. I'll keep an eye on possible failures of cron job.

EDIT: @max-models I'll wait for your re-review (actually required by our rules).

max-models · 2025-11-21T18:48:02Z

Is there anything more that needs to be done before merging this? It looks good to me!

Thanks a lot for your timely review. I checked the changes again myself, and I haven't found anything which would need rework, so I'm going to merge it. I'll keep an eye on possible failures of cron job.

EDIT: @max-models I'll wait for your re-review (actually required by our rules).

Great! Looks good to me, I approved again!

pseewald · 2025-11-21T19:06:08Z

@gnikit or @awvwgk could you review as well (or give your ok to merge anyway)?

gnikit · 2025-11-21T19:07:54Z

Yes of course. Will do later tonight if that’s okay.

…

On Fri, 21 Nov 2025 at 19:06, Patrick Seewald ***@***.***> wrote: *pseewald* left a comment (fortran-lang/fprettify#188) <#188 (comment)> @gnikit <https://github.com/gnikit> or @awvwgk <https://github.com/awvwgk> could you review as well (or give your ok to merge anyway)? — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#188 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AD3FKZFW4FNNDOZD22ERRHT355PDLAVCNFSM6AAAAACLTFRGPOVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZTKNRUGI3DSOJWG4> . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>

gnikit

nice work @pseewald

This overwrites input fortran files which can be useful for - testing idempotency (by running tests twice) - tracking formatting changes when tests are failing (by running tests twice with different fprettify versions) Dump original Fortran files into timestamped backup directory

this bug caused 2 test cases to be indeterministic: - RosettaCodeData/Task/Cartesian-product-of-two-or-more-lists/Fortran/cartesian-product-of-two-or-more-lists.f - RosettaCodeData/Task/Evolutionary-algorithm/Fortran/evolutionary-algorithm-1.f

This regex caused fprettify to be stuck on file c2k/src/beta_gamma_psi.F

and remove lengthy tests from regular testing

pseewald · 2025-11-22T10:37:38Z

I had to rebase the entire branch post-review (because the branch was previously updated using merge commits) - I checked myself that diff between cc5d03f (old HEAD) and 904241c (new HEAD) is empty. Merging now.

This was referenced Nov 9, 2025

Looking for collaborator(s) to maintain fprettify #127

Open

Fixes and new options #99

Open

max-models reviewed Nov 11, 2025

View reviewed changes

run_tests.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

dbroemmel reviewed Nov 11, 2025

View reviewed changes

examples/out/example_swapcase.f90 Show resolved Hide resolved

pseewald requested review from dbroemmel and max-models November 11, 2025 19:30

max-models approved these changes Nov 11, 2025

View reviewed changes

pseewald requested a review from max-models November 21, 2025 18:39

max-models approved these changes Nov 21, 2025

View reviewed changes

gnikit approved these changes Nov 21, 2025

View reviewed changes

max-models mentioned this pull request Nov 21, 2025

py-fprettify: Patch v0.3.7 spack/spack-packages#2517

Open

pseewald added 11 commits November 22, 2025 11:29

new testing mechanism working now

b29ac98

Unit tests: use fprettify as a module instead of relying on subprocesses

159199d

finish core work on test reorganization

0e80f91

suppress exceptions from test output (closes fortran-lang#134)

3a123ef

polishing test suites

5cf8157

Splitting test class into unit and integration tests

5422eef

minor cleanups and test fixes

c3c4e0d

More test fixes

bd71b55

More test fixes

8c818be

Updating test results

f0f0234

pseewald added 19 commits November 22, 2025 11:31

Setting limit to number of lines per file (to speedup cron tests)

729fc3c

Allow to set options as annotations within Fortran file

91be0f0

cosmetic

5c74d2b

Fix bug related to first line

5bcc17d

this bug caused 2 test cases to be indeterministic: - RosettaCodeData/Task/Cartesian-product-of-two-or-more-lists/Fortran/cartesian-product-of-two-or-more-lists.f - RosettaCodeData/Task/Evolutionary-algorithm/Fortran/evolutionary-algorithm-1.f

Fix regex

3f5b84a

This regex caused fprettify to be stuck on file c2k/src/beta_gamma_psi.F

Update cron test results

65d748f

Clean up file

9197c7d

Explaining test mechanism in README.md

32257d4

Further working on README.md for tests

4d5e550

update README.md

2dc530b

minor change

98640ac

removed todo

9a0e0b6

Adapt test workflows to new test mechanism

094c7cb

and remove lengthy tests from regular testing

fix issues with gh actions test workflow

ccbc95c

simplify cli as suggested by @max-models

c793c12

fix typos (as suggested by @dbroemmel)

117419d

cleanups

699faaa

revert removal of shutil import

048e673

applied change lost in rebase

904241c

pseewald force-pushed the 140-testing-mechanism branch from cc5d03f to 904241c Compare November 22, 2025 10:34

pseewald merged commit 97e799b into fortran-lang:master Nov 22, 2025
4 checks passed

pseewald deleted the 140-testing-mechanism branch November 22, 2025 10:39

pseewald mentioned this pull request Nov 22, 2025

Formatting with black and isort #189

Open

140 testing mechanism #188

140 testing mechanism #188

Uh oh!

Conversation

pseewald commented Nov 9, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

coveralls commented Nov 9, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 19594268342

Details

💛 - Coveralls

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

dbroemmel Nov 11, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

dbroemmel Nov 11, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

max-models left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

max-models Nov 11, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

pseewald Nov 21, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

max-models commented Nov 21, 2025

Uh oh!

pseewald commented Nov 21, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

max-models commented Nov 21, 2025

Uh oh!

pseewald commented Nov 21, 2025

Uh oh!

gnikit commented Nov 21, 2025 via email

Uh oh!

gnikit left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

pseewald commented Nov 22, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

pseewald commented Nov 9, 2025 •

edited

Loading

coveralls commented Nov 9, 2025 •

edited

Loading

pseewald commented Nov 21, 2025 •

edited

Loading