How to get scalacheck to work on class with a Seq?
I have a case class that I am trying to test via ScalaCheck. The case class contains other classes.
Here are the classes:
case class Shop(name: String = "", colors: Seq[Color] = Nil)
case class Color(colorName: String = "", shades: Seq[Shade] = Nil)
case class Shade(shadeName: String, value: Int)
I have generators for each one
implicit def shopGen: Gen[Shop] =
for {
name <- Gen.alphaStr.suchThat(_.length > 0)
colors <- Gen.listOf(colorsGen)
} yield Shop(name, colors)
implicit def colorsGen: Gen[Color] =
for {
colorName <- Gen.alphaStr.suchThat(_.length > 0)
shades <- Gen.listOf(shadesGen)
} yield Color(colorName, shades)
implicit def shadesGen: Gen[Shade] =
for {
shadeName <- Gen.alphaStr.suchThat(_.length > 0) //**Note this**
value <- Gen.choose(1, Int.MaxValue)
} yield Shade(shadeName, value)
When I write my test and simply do the below:
property("Shops must encode/decode to/from JSON") {
"test" mustBe "test
}
I get an error and the test hangs and stops after 51 tries. The error I get is Gave up after 1 successful property evaluation. 51 evaluations were discarded.
If I remove Gen.alphaStr.suchThat(_.length > 0)
from shadesGen
and just replace it with Gen.alphaStr
then it works.
Question
- Why does having
Gen.alphaStr
work forshadesGen
, however,Gen.alphaStr.suchThat(_.length > 0)
does not? - Also when I run test multiple times (with
Gen.alphaStr
) some pass while some don't. Why is this?
scala scalacheck
|
show 2 more comments
I have a case class that I am trying to test via ScalaCheck. The case class contains other classes.
Here are the classes:
case class Shop(name: String = "", colors: Seq[Color] = Nil)
case class Color(colorName: String = "", shades: Seq[Shade] = Nil)
case class Shade(shadeName: String, value: Int)
I have generators for each one
implicit def shopGen: Gen[Shop] =
for {
name <- Gen.alphaStr.suchThat(_.length > 0)
colors <- Gen.listOf(colorsGen)
} yield Shop(name, colors)
implicit def colorsGen: Gen[Color] =
for {
colorName <- Gen.alphaStr.suchThat(_.length > 0)
shades <- Gen.listOf(shadesGen)
} yield Color(colorName, shades)
implicit def shadesGen: Gen[Shade] =
for {
shadeName <- Gen.alphaStr.suchThat(_.length > 0) //**Note this**
value <- Gen.choose(1, Int.MaxValue)
} yield Shade(shadeName, value)
When I write my test and simply do the below:
property("Shops must encode/decode to/from JSON") {
"test" mustBe "test
}
I get an error and the test hangs and stops after 51 tries. The error I get is Gave up after 1 successful property evaluation. 51 evaluations were discarded.
If I remove Gen.alphaStr.suchThat(_.length > 0)
from shadesGen
and just replace it with Gen.alphaStr
then it works.
Question
- Why does having
Gen.alphaStr
work forshadesGen
, however,Gen.alphaStr.suchThat(_.length > 0)
does not? - Also when I run test multiple times (with
Gen.alphaStr
) some pass while some don't. Why is this?
scala scalacheck
What is the property you are testing? How do you test the property? When you don't show your code, we find it difficult to help you.
– Bob Dalgleish
Nov 22 at 17:45
I can put anything there. but still it fails. I've updated the question.
– Anthony
Nov 22 at 18:00
"Gave up" is the clue -- it means you are discarding too many data values, likely with thesuchThat()
filter. Change to a generator that never fails.
– Bob Dalgleish
Nov 22 at 18:03
"Change to a generator that never fails" by this do you meanGen.alphaStr
instead ofGen.alphaStr.suchThat(_.length > 0)
? The former works for me but when I run multiple test runs, it sometimes fails.
– Anthony
Nov 22 at 18:10
1
Does it always fail with "Gave up ..."? If so, there must be some other filtering going on.
– Bob Dalgleish
Nov 22 at 18:23
|
show 2 more comments
I have a case class that I am trying to test via ScalaCheck. The case class contains other classes.
Here are the classes:
case class Shop(name: String = "", colors: Seq[Color] = Nil)
case class Color(colorName: String = "", shades: Seq[Shade] = Nil)
case class Shade(shadeName: String, value: Int)
I have generators for each one
implicit def shopGen: Gen[Shop] =
for {
name <- Gen.alphaStr.suchThat(_.length > 0)
colors <- Gen.listOf(colorsGen)
} yield Shop(name, colors)
implicit def colorsGen: Gen[Color] =
for {
colorName <- Gen.alphaStr.suchThat(_.length > 0)
shades <- Gen.listOf(shadesGen)
} yield Color(colorName, shades)
implicit def shadesGen: Gen[Shade] =
for {
shadeName <- Gen.alphaStr.suchThat(_.length > 0) //**Note this**
value <- Gen.choose(1, Int.MaxValue)
} yield Shade(shadeName, value)
When I write my test and simply do the below:
property("Shops must encode/decode to/from JSON") {
"test" mustBe "test
}
I get an error and the test hangs and stops after 51 tries. The error I get is Gave up after 1 successful property evaluation. 51 evaluations were discarded.
If I remove Gen.alphaStr.suchThat(_.length > 0)
from shadesGen
and just replace it with Gen.alphaStr
then it works.
Question
- Why does having
Gen.alphaStr
work forshadesGen
, however,Gen.alphaStr.suchThat(_.length > 0)
does not? - Also when I run test multiple times (with
Gen.alphaStr
) some pass while some don't. Why is this?
scala scalacheck
I have a case class that I am trying to test via ScalaCheck. The case class contains other classes.
Here are the classes:
case class Shop(name: String = "", colors: Seq[Color] = Nil)
case class Color(colorName: String = "", shades: Seq[Shade] = Nil)
case class Shade(shadeName: String, value: Int)
I have generators for each one
implicit def shopGen: Gen[Shop] =
for {
name <- Gen.alphaStr.suchThat(_.length > 0)
colors <- Gen.listOf(colorsGen)
} yield Shop(name, colors)
implicit def colorsGen: Gen[Color] =
for {
colorName <- Gen.alphaStr.suchThat(_.length > 0)
shades <- Gen.listOf(shadesGen)
} yield Color(colorName, shades)
implicit def shadesGen: Gen[Shade] =
for {
shadeName <- Gen.alphaStr.suchThat(_.length > 0) //**Note this**
value <- Gen.choose(1, Int.MaxValue)
} yield Shade(shadeName, value)
When I write my test and simply do the below:
property("Shops must encode/decode to/from JSON") {
"test" mustBe "test
}
I get an error and the test hangs and stops after 51 tries. The error I get is Gave up after 1 successful property evaluation. 51 evaluations were discarded.
If I remove Gen.alphaStr.suchThat(_.length > 0)
from shadesGen
and just replace it with Gen.alphaStr
then it works.
Question
- Why does having
Gen.alphaStr
work forshadesGen
, however,Gen.alphaStr.suchThat(_.length > 0)
does not? - Also when I run test multiple times (with
Gen.alphaStr
) some pass while some don't. Why is this?
scala scalacheck
scala scalacheck
edited Nov 22 at 18:00
asked Nov 22 at 17:31
Anthony
9,6002288174
9,6002288174
What is the property you are testing? How do you test the property? When you don't show your code, we find it difficult to help you.
– Bob Dalgleish
Nov 22 at 17:45
I can put anything there. but still it fails. I've updated the question.
– Anthony
Nov 22 at 18:00
"Gave up" is the clue -- it means you are discarding too many data values, likely with thesuchThat()
filter. Change to a generator that never fails.
– Bob Dalgleish
Nov 22 at 18:03
"Change to a generator that never fails" by this do you meanGen.alphaStr
instead ofGen.alphaStr.suchThat(_.length > 0)
? The former works for me but when I run multiple test runs, it sometimes fails.
– Anthony
Nov 22 at 18:10
1
Does it always fail with "Gave up ..."? If so, there must be some other filtering going on.
– Bob Dalgleish
Nov 22 at 18:23
|
show 2 more comments
What is the property you are testing? How do you test the property? When you don't show your code, we find it difficult to help you.
– Bob Dalgleish
Nov 22 at 17:45
I can put anything there. but still it fails. I've updated the question.
– Anthony
Nov 22 at 18:00
"Gave up" is the clue -- it means you are discarding too many data values, likely with thesuchThat()
filter. Change to a generator that never fails.
– Bob Dalgleish
Nov 22 at 18:03
"Change to a generator that never fails" by this do you meanGen.alphaStr
instead ofGen.alphaStr.suchThat(_.length > 0)
? The former works for me but when I run multiple test runs, it sometimes fails.
– Anthony
Nov 22 at 18:10
1
Does it always fail with "Gave up ..."? If so, there must be some other filtering going on.
– Bob Dalgleish
Nov 22 at 18:23
What is the property you are testing? How do you test the property? When you don't show your code, we find it difficult to help you.
– Bob Dalgleish
Nov 22 at 17:45
What is the property you are testing? How do you test the property? When you don't show your code, we find it difficult to help you.
– Bob Dalgleish
Nov 22 at 17:45
I can put anything there. but still it fails. I've updated the question.
– Anthony
Nov 22 at 18:00
I can put anything there. but still it fails. I've updated the question.
– Anthony
Nov 22 at 18:00
"Gave up" is the clue -- it means you are discarding too many data values, likely with the
suchThat()
filter. Change to a generator that never fails.– Bob Dalgleish
Nov 22 at 18:03
"Gave up" is the clue -- it means you are discarding too many data values, likely with the
suchThat()
filter. Change to a generator that never fails.– Bob Dalgleish
Nov 22 at 18:03
"Change to a generator that never fails" by this do you mean
Gen.alphaStr
instead of Gen.alphaStr.suchThat(_.length > 0)
? The former works for me but when I run multiple test runs, it sometimes fails.– Anthony
Nov 22 at 18:10
"Change to a generator that never fails" by this do you mean
Gen.alphaStr
instead of Gen.alphaStr.suchThat(_.length > 0)
? The former works for me but when I run multiple test runs, it sometimes fails.– Anthony
Nov 22 at 18:10
1
1
Does it always fail with "Gave up ..."? If so, there must be some other filtering going on.
– Bob Dalgleish
Nov 22 at 18:23
Does it always fail with "Gave up ..."? If so, there must be some other filtering going on.
– Bob Dalgleish
Nov 22 at 18:23
|
show 2 more comments
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
You probably see this behavior because of the way listOf
is implemented. Inside it is based on buildableOf
which is in turn based on buildableOfN
which has following comment:
... If the given generator fails generating a value, the
complete container generator will also fail.
Your data structure is essentially a list of lists so even one bad generation will curse the whole data-structure to be discarded. And obviously most of the failures happens at the bottom level. That's why removing the filter for shadeName
helps. So to make it work you should generate more valid strings. You may change Gen.alphaStr
to some custom-made generator based on nonEmptyListOf
such as:
def nonemptyAlphaStr:Gen[String] = Gen.nonEmptyListOf(alphaChar).map(_.mkString)
Another simple way to work this around is to use retryUntil
instead of suchThat
such as in:
implicit def shadesGen: Gen[Shade] =
for {
//shadeName <- Gen.alphaStr.suchThat(_.length > 0) //**Note this**
shadeName <- Gen.alphaStr.retryUntil(_.length > 0)
value <- Gen.choose(1, Int.MaxValue)
} yield Shade(shadeName, value)
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53435893%2fhow-to-get-scalacheck-to-work-on-class-with-a-seq%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
You probably see this behavior because of the way listOf
is implemented. Inside it is based on buildableOf
which is in turn based on buildableOfN
which has following comment:
... If the given generator fails generating a value, the
complete container generator will also fail.
Your data structure is essentially a list of lists so even one bad generation will curse the whole data-structure to be discarded. And obviously most of the failures happens at the bottom level. That's why removing the filter for shadeName
helps. So to make it work you should generate more valid strings. You may change Gen.alphaStr
to some custom-made generator based on nonEmptyListOf
such as:
def nonemptyAlphaStr:Gen[String] = Gen.nonEmptyListOf(alphaChar).map(_.mkString)
Another simple way to work this around is to use retryUntil
instead of suchThat
such as in:
implicit def shadesGen: Gen[Shade] =
for {
//shadeName <- Gen.alphaStr.suchThat(_.length > 0) //**Note this**
shadeName <- Gen.alphaStr.retryUntil(_.length > 0)
value <- Gen.choose(1, Int.MaxValue)
} yield Shade(shadeName, value)
add a comment |
You probably see this behavior because of the way listOf
is implemented. Inside it is based on buildableOf
which is in turn based on buildableOfN
which has following comment:
... If the given generator fails generating a value, the
complete container generator will also fail.
Your data structure is essentially a list of lists so even one bad generation will curse the whole data-structure to be discarded. And obviously most of the failures happens at the bottom level. That's why removing the filter for shadeName
helps. So to make it work you should generate more valid strings. You may change Gen.alphaStr
to some custom-made generator based on nonEmptyListOf
such as:
def nonemptyAlphaStr:Gen[String] = Gen.nonEmptyListOf(alphaChar).map(_.mkString)
Another simple way to work this around is to use retryUntil
instead of suchThat
such as in:
implicit def shadesGen: Gen[Shade] =
for {
//shadeName <- Gen.alphaStr.suchThat(_.length > 0) //**Note this**
shadeName <- Gen.alphaStr.retryUntil(_.length > 0)
value <- Gen.choose(1, Int.MaxValue)
} yield Shade(shadeName, value)
add a comment |
You probably see this behavior because of the way listOf
is implemented. Inside it is based on buildableOf
which is in turn based on buildableOfN
which has following comment:
... If the given generator fails generating a value, the
complete container generator will also fail.
Your data structure is essentially a list of lists so even one bad generation will curse the whole data-structure to be discarded. And obviously most of the failures happens at the bottom level. That's why removing the filter for shadeName
helps. So to make it work you should generate more valid strings. You may change Gen.alphaStr
to some custom-made generator based on nonEmptyListOf
such as:
def nonemptyAlphaStr:Gen[String] = Gen.nonEmptyListOf(alphaChar).map(_.mkString)
Another simple way to work this around is to use retryUntil
instead of suchThat
such as in:
implicit def shadesGen: Gen[Shade] =
for {
//shadeName <- Gen.alphaStr.suchThat(_.length > 0) //**Note this**
shadeName <- Gen.alphaStr.retryUntil(_.length > 0)
value <- Gen.choose(1, Int.MaxValue)
} yield Shade(shadeName, value)
You probably see this behavior because of the way listOf
is implemented. Inside it is based on buildableOf
which is in turn based on buildableOfN
which has following comment:
... If the given generator fails generating a value, the
complete container generator will also fail.
Your data structure is essentially a list of lists so even one bad generation will curse the whole data-structure to be discarded. And obviously most of the failures happens at the bottom level. That's why removing the filter for shadeName
helps. So to make it work you should generate more valid strings. You may change Gen.alphaStr
to some custom-made generator based on nonEmptyListOf
such as:
def nonemptyAlphaStr:Gen[String] = Gen.nonEmptyListOf(alphaChar).map(_.mkString)
Another simple way to work this around is to use retryUntil
instead of suchThat
such as in:
implicit def shadesGen: Gen[Shade] =
for {
//shadeName <- Gen.alphaStr.suchThat(_.length > 0) //**Note this**
shadeName <- Gen.alphaStr.retryUntil(_.length > 0)
value <- Gen.choose(1, Int.MaxValue)
} yield Shade(shadeName, value)
answered Nov 26 at 3:55
SergGr
18.8k22243
18.8k22243
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53435893%2fhow-to-get-scalacheck-to-work-on-class-with-a-seq%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
What is the property you are testing? How do you test the property? When you don't show your code, we find it difficult to help you.
– Bob Dalgleish
Nov 22 at 17:45
I can put anything there. but still it fails. I've updated the question.
– Anthony
Nov 22 at 18:00
"Gave up" is the clue -- it means you are discarding too many data values, likely with the
suchThat()
filter. Change to a generator that never fails.– Bob Dalgleish
Nov 22 at 18:03
"Change to a generator that never fails" by this do you mean
Gen.alphaStr
instead ofGen.alphaStr.suchThat(_.length > 0)
? The former works for me but when I run multiple test runs, it sometimes fails.– Anthony
Nov 22 at 18:10
1
Does it always fail with "Gave up ..."? If so, there must be some other filtering going on.
– Bob Dalgleish
Nov 22 at 18:23