search

amiller / HoneyBadgerBFT

The Honey Badger of BFT Protocols
Other
314 stars 84 forks source link

Fix assert N lte f*3 + 1 statement in rbc #35

Closed sbellem closed 7 years ago

sbellem commented 7 years ago

See failed test for (N=5, f=1) at https://travis-ci.org/amiller/HoneyBadgerBFT/builds/268545803#L1923

Note about usage of pytest

I decided to use pytest to showcase some of its powers. That is barely scratching the surface, but yet the parametrization capabilities of pytest are very useful and can save considerable development time.

I suspect that something similar can be achieved with nose2 but I didn't have enough time to look into it.

When I have time I can write the test with nose2 parametrization approach.

codecov-io commented 7 years ago

Codecov Report

Merging #35 into dev will decrease coverage by 1.16%. The diff coverage is 100%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##              dev      #35      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   58.96%   57.79%   -1.17%     
==========================================
  Files          18       18              
  Lines         943      943              
==========================================
- Hits          556      545      -11     
- Misses        387      398      +11
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
honeybadgerbft/core/reliablebroadcast.py 70.5% <100%> (ø) :arrow_up:
honeybadgerbft/core/commonsubset.py 70.96% <0%> (-19.36%) :arrow_down:
honeybadgerbft/core/binaryagreement.py 79.22% <0%> (-9.1%) :arrow_down:
honeybadgerbft/core/honeybadger.py 88.46% <0%> (+1.92%) :arrow_up:

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data Powered by Codecov. Last update cb69dbd...3e1a104. Read the comment docs.

amiller commented 7 years ago

Very compelling, good catch thanks!