Extract parse() function, and add unittest for Diceparser
#15
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't know which IDE you are using but you can ask cmake to compile in debug by giving it the right parameter. Qt Creator manages it for me but don't need to change the CMakefiles.txt. I know you will remove it.
But it could be cool to compile test when debug is enabled and forget them in release.
| Die::ArithmeticOperator m_op; | ||
|
|
||
| std::mt19937 m_rng; | ||
| static std::shared_ptr<RandomGenerator> m_rng; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think it is useful to put a shared pointer on a static member. Both mechanisms have quiet the same goal.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You are totally right, thanks for pointing it.
| @@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ void FilterNode::run(ExecutionNode* previous) | |||
| { | |||
| if(m_validator->hasValid(tmp,m_eachValue)) | |||
| { | |||
| Die* tmpdie = new Die(); | |||
| Die* tmpdie = new Die(-1,-1); // yaaaaaarggl what does this block of code does? | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
All those code samples are doing the same thing, make a copy a die to do some work about this die without changing the original die.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ok, so a copie constructor should do the trick. I will test.
|
I took the time to read the whole text. To be honest, I was thinking to replace API of diceparser to return JSON data. And let the client deal with it. I did not work about it but it seems to me a good solution because many languages support it. DiceParser is really good. It got some improvements and it does a really good job. But When I started its design I didn't know a lot of things about rpg system and so on. The compiler/interpretor/parsing part is using mechanism about my compilation course I had several years ago (as far i remember). When I had to add some new features or new mechanism it works like a charm. Even there are some ugly small changes but those changes are more tips that deep behavior. I develop Rolisteam and all its component as simple as I can. I will clone your repo on my personal account, then I will try to compile it and help you a bit with that. |
Usually vim + all the unix tools, but for rolisteam I'm using QtCreator because I wasn't able to print the content of a QString in gdb (I didn't took much time to investigate). I'm also not really fluent with Cmake, so it was mostly a "make things works" patch. Thanks for telling me that QtCreator is smarter than I knew, I will look at it (and it's also probably the case for cmake). |
I totally agree. I would not be working on this project if I didn't liked it in the first time!
It's totally understandable, and you are totally right. Ideally I would like to be able to give you a proposition, were you could say "Yes I like it", and it would cost you no more work!
A saw that you were accepting PR, and really reactive. It is a pleasant experience for me.
Currently I am testing stuff, but I should shortly start to put everything together. I will take 3 week of vacations without a computer, so it should be done in July. What I would like is a clear API: you give a string in input and you get a structure in output. This structure should be easily convertible to and from json. Internally, I want to have an explicit grammar (probably using PEGTL) instead of the current manual parsing. This should allow easier modification by being able to see the grammar itself. And for the output structure, I am currently experimenting to see what need to be put inside, and what does not. Do you have any specification on your current json format? I didn't find it. Currently it is still changing too much, but as soon as I have something clean, I will share you the result. |
|
Ok, It is true that using a tool to implement the grammar and get a syntax parser can be really useful. In rolisteam, I use same mechanism (parsing by hand) to manage formula inside character sheet. PEGTL looks like good solution because it is cross-platform and it is header only. If you have to switch to another tool, we will have to make sure the next component is cross-platform and not a nightmare to integrate (such as boost). So if you do the change it will be good if I can follow changes (even better take part of it) New feature : Several command at onceOne feature which may be interesting to implement is a way to execute several time the same command. My first draft about the syntax will be something like that: The goal for DiceParser is to return 3 results. New feature : Detect doubleSome games trigger some event when double value are rolled I have no clue about the syntax. |
I will look at it once I will have finished to work on diceparser. Anyway, I planned to do some UI stuff to have a better experience while creating the character sheet. But later!
I get your concern.
Of course :)
You are welcome to take part of it. I don't want to steal your time, but if you want to participate you are more than welcome. In your opinon what is the best way to exchange? With pull request to be able to easily comment a line? Or with another medium (mail, forum, reddit, …)?
At the moment just add the stuff you need on the current Diceparser (but don't implement my ideas unless you want them now, I'll do it in my v2), and I will integrate them in my re-write later (if my re-write is successful). Just keep me in touch so I will consider them when doing the design.
Nice ideas.We may use By the way, what is you politic about depreciation? If the |
unittest/unittest.cpp
Outdated
| @@ -105,6 +105,8 @@ TEST_CASE("group", "operator") { | |||
| CHECK( roll("4d10g10", {2,2,9,9}) == "2" ); | |||
| CHECK( roll("4d10g10", {7,4,3,6}) == "2" ); | |||
| CHECK( roll("4d10g10", {8,4,3,7}) == "2" ); | |||
| CHECK( roll("12d100g100", {/* group A = 100 */ 50, 25, 25, /* group B = 100 */ 33, 34, 32, 1, /* group C = 100 */ 10, 11, 12, 13, 54}) == "3" ); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I try to debug it but G operator receive as previous result: 51, 51,51, 51,51, 51,51, 51,51, 51,51, 51.
The problem is there not in the g operator.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I this I found the issue. I will push the fix tomorow.
The value generated by a random generator is scaled down to match the interval of the desired value. I assumed it was using modulo, not divide, to scale down, but I was wrong. So I added a parameter to the mock to specify the range of the desired values. It's a quirk to have a scale of 1, and thus no scaling.
|
I fixed the mock.
I pushed my draft of my re-write on gitlab. For the moment, I didn't implemented the parsing, I was mostly playing with the output structure. It is still in an early draft phase (no clang-format, single file, no build toolchain, lots of refactoring to do, …). The only dependency is catch2 (in a submodule). I implemented an algorithm for group witch is working for all the cases I found relevant (you can see them in the unit tests at the end of the file). If you want to run them, compile interface2.cpp, and execute the generated binary (with "-h" to get the options, you may be interested by "-s"). |
|
I see that you are using a lot of C++ specific/new stuffs: template, lambda, etc.. I always paid attention about this subject. I want python dev/java dev to be about to read the code and understand it. Even a non programmer may understand some stuff (if he can read english). Other point, could you follow Rolisteam coding rules ? At least for naming stuff and curly brackets? // please } Clang format can do that for you. I plan to write my own configuration of clangformat to make it easier. it is old and not fully respected but : http://wiki.rolisteam.org/index.php/CodingRules |
|
I see that you are using a lot of C++ specific/new stuffs: template,
lambda, etc..
So you will probably reduce the code line count by a huge amount but
anyone who wants to contribute will need high level in C++ skills.
The code definitively need some polish (I overused inline lambda and stuff
like that, I need to split up the code in logical files, etc). I will do it
when I will come back from vacation. My first goal was to have a proof of
concept to be sure I could do what I want.
About the new features of c++, I totally disagree that I should not use
them (unless their is a compiler compatibility issue). I'm using c++03 at
work, and I can guarantee you that the code is much more complicated that
if it used modern c++. And lambda are also used since java 8, and IIRC also
in python ;) But I get your concern about readability. I know I need to add
some comments, especially for the "g" operator to explain the general
logic, and what each function does if the name isn't totally explicit. Also
splitting the code in logical files would help.
Other point, could you follow Rolisteam coding rules ? At least for
naming stuff and curly brackets?
no _ separator in fonction/variable name. Use uppercase letter:
MyClassName, myFunctionName(), myVariableName(). It helps to separate std::
stuff and local stuff.
Totally. Like I said I didn't took the time to set up clang format, so all
the curly brace/indentation stuff will be fixed. About the naming, I'm not
even consistent in my file and I will fix that (it's unusual for me to not
be consistent on a coding standard).
Clang format can do that for you. I plan to write my own configuration of
clangformat to make it easier.
If you create one, I will gladly import it, otherwise I will probably use
k&r style. IIRC it's the one I prefer.
it is old and not fully respected but : http://wiki.rolisteam.org/
index.php/CodingRules
Nice, I didn't saw it, I will follow it.
|
Do not integrates thoses commit they are not ready, I am doing this PR because I need some help, and I thought it was the best way to discuss and let you see my code
Hello,
Since I started to do some modifications in DiceParser, I was never confident that I would not broke something. It's why I wanted to add unit tests for all operators. Furthurmore, I discovered a bunch of bugs (including core dumps) in the previous month witch could have been spotted by tests.
To add unit tests, the first step was to make the dies mockable (you can't unittest randomness!).
Then I extracted the
parse()function to have a simple interface (you give it a string, you get back the result). This function will be called both from the cli (and other medium like discord, but I didn't do the modifications yet), and from my future unit tests. I tried my best to only move some part of the code without changing how it's working. Polishing will come when the unit tests will be working (and before the merge request).After that I added unit tests. This add a dependency to Catch2. Technically I could have just copied one .h file (this library can be used as a single file, header-only library), but I think that by adding the submodule it should be easier to update Catch2 in the future. I mostly copy-pasted the CMakeList.txt file, and did not took the time to clean it up and will do before asking for the merge.
For debuging purpose, I added the
-gflag in the CMakeList.txt files. When the PR will be ready, I will remove this commit.The reason I am doing this PR is because I really don't understand how the operator evaluation is working (especially the role of the attribute set by the
displayed()fonction. In the cli, it's working fine, but in the unit tests, I can't make it work for anything that include a sort, or witch return multiple values. I you have any clue on how to make the parse function working for the unittests, it would help me a lot.Anyway, the more I look at the Diceparser core (the part that compute the dice result, not the interface like text/json/svg/discord/twitter/… output), the more I think it would be much easier to re-write it. However I don't want to throw the baby with the bath water (nor the bathroom or the plumbing either)! I definitively like the mini-language that you created, and the fact that you interact with lots of differents services (rolisteam/discord/cli/…), so what I would like to do it to create a drop-in replacement of the parsing and evaluating. It's why I extracted the
parse()function (if I do the re-write, it's what I will change), and the unit tests (to validate that I didn't broke anything). That way, if you like my re-write (that I have yet to do), you could either chose to use it, or keep the current code but with a better code coverage.I hope you didn't rolled a critical miss against this wall of text! If you don't have time to look at it, it's not really a problem, since I will be in vacation for 3 weeks in June without access to a computer, so I don't really expect to finish everything before end of July.
Rolistically,
Robin.
So my short term goals are:
parse()functionThen I think we could discuss on the interface of the
parse()function. I think that returning a tree of results is probably the best, with some utility functions to convert it to text, handling color, and maybe other details that I don't see right know.