Improve unit test coverage

insight-lane / crash-model

Build a crash prediction modeling application that leverages multiple data sources to generate a set of dynamic predictions we can use to identify potential trouble spots and direct timely safety interventions.

https://insightlane.org

MIT License

113 stars 39 forks source link

Improve unit test coverage #118

Closed terryf82 closed 5 years ago

terryf82 commented 6 years ago

I don't have much experience here so please chime in with opinions.

This will probably spawn several issues but as a starting point

which specific areas do we think need better coverage?
how do we determine when we have 'enough' testing (is something like https://coverage.readthedocs.io/en/coverage-4.5.1/ useful)?
can these tests be incorporated into our github C.I setup?
what have we tested well so far? what have we tested poorly?

j-t-t commented 6 years ago

I really think that everything needs better coverage. (I'm also of the opinion that every time one fixes a bug, there should be a test added that fails before the test fix and passes after, but that's not something that's reasonable to require)

coverage is a great tool, but how much coverage we'd like is probably up for debate.

Our continuous integration runs py.test, which runs every python test anywhere under src, so any new tests will get run as well.

terryf82 commented 6 years ago

Working to implement codecov (https://codecov.io/gh/Data4Democracy/crash-model/branch/coverage) but waiting on assistance from D4D member with admin GitHub access.

bpben commented 5 years ago

Looks like we're done here. We have another issue for continuing tracking of codecov #131 .