Difference between revisions of "Talk:Wiki regression testing"
(Created page with '==On the usefulness of reg.testing== re: https://plus.google.com/u/0/114804369744409916883/posts/JvozgQxVAyT I do find them very useful for certain purposes, although I agree the…') |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==On the usefulness of reg.testing== |
==On the usefulness of reg.testing== |
||
re: https://plus.google.com/u/0/114804369744409916883/posts/JvozgQxVAyT I do find them very useful for certain purposes, although I agree they are not regression tests. I'm not sure what it should be called, but I consider it a tiny 'corpus' of stuff that used to be broken and/or easily tends to break if I'm not careful when changing rules or dictionaries. (However, I'd find them less annoying if we could do "<code>test|lang|source sentence|possible target sentence 1|possible target sentence 2|…|possible target sentence N</code>".) The before/after corpus test which Jacob mentions is in general a lot more helpful to find improvements (or degradations) in quality, while testvoc scripts (both based on lt-expand and corpus testvoc) is helpful in guiding developement. --[[User:Unhammer|unhammer]] 10:53, 21 November 2011 (UTC) |
re: https://plus.google.com/u/0/114804369744409916883/posts/JvozgQxVAyT I do find them very useful for certain purposes, although I agree they are not regression tests. I'm not sure what it should be called, but I consider it a tiny 'corpus' of stuff that used to be broken and/or easily tends to break if I'm not careful when changing rules or dictionaries. (However, I'd find them less annoying and more realistic if we could do "<code>test|lang|source sentence|possible target sentence 1|possible target sentence 2|…|possible target sentence N</code>".) The before/after corpus test which Jacob mentions is in general a lot more helpful to find improvements (or degradations) in quality, while testvoc scripts (both based on lt-expand and corpus testvoc) is helpful in guiding developement. --[[User:Unhammer|unhammer]] 10:53, 21 November 2011 (UTC) |
||
Revision as of 10:54, 21 November 2011
On the usefulness of reg.testing
re: https://plus.google.com/u/0/114804369744409916883/posts/JvozgQxVAyT I do find them very useful for certain purposes, although I agree they are not regression tests. I'm not sure what it should be called, but I consider it a tiny 'corpus' of stuff that used to be broken and/or easily tends to break if I'm not careful when changing rules or dictionaries. (However, I'd find them less annoying and more realistic if we could do "test|lang|source sentence|possible target sentence 1|possible target sentence 2|…|possible target sentence N".) The before/after corpus test which Jacob mentions is in general a lot more helpful to find improvements (or degradations) in quality, while testvoc scripts (both based on lt-expand and corpus testvoc) is helpful in guiding developement. --unhammer 10:53, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
