Test Case 4 (TC 4): Hippocraticness

[anthonyanjorin]

A synchroniser is hippocratic if it does not do anything for a pair of models that is already consistent (even if the delta to be propagated is not idle).

Note that this is more than stability, but less than least change.

[anthonyanjorin]

Suggested consistent precondition (postcondition of #6 ):

FamilyRegister {

• Skinner
• Flanders
  • Rod (son)
• Simpsons
  • Bart (father)
• Simpsons
  • Homer (father)
  • Marge (mother)
  • Bart (son)
  • Bart (son)
  • Lisa (daughter)
  • Maggie (daughter)

}

PersonRegister {

• Flanders, Rod (male)
• Simpson, Bart (male)
• Simpson, Homer (male)
• Simpson, Marge (female)
• Simpson, Bart (male)
• Simpson, Bart (male)
• Simpson, Lisa (female)
• Simpson, Maggie (female)

}

To finalise the precondition, set birthdays of all persons in the person register as an idle target update.

---

Source delta: Delete the empty family Skinner in the family register and propagate. Expected postcondition: person register (now with birthdays set!) should remain unchanged.

[anthonyanjorin]

Features: [round trip | del+attr | fixed | structural]

Not sure if the test is corr-based or not :( I think not; even if a tool completely messes up the correspondence link, it should still be possible to pass the test as this doesn't seem relevant.

[anthonyanjorin]

I guess setting of birthdays could be moved to establishing the precondition as this is already tested in #10