From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Tino Calancha Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#25618: 25.1.91; More precise limit for tagging expensive tests Date: Sat, 4 Feb 2017 23:13:16 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: References: <87inoqqdgr.fsf@calancha-pc> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1486217652 27416 195.159.176.226 (4 Feb 2017 14:14:12 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 4 Feb 2017 14:14:12 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07) Cc: 25618@debbugs.gnu.org, Tino Calancha To: Noam Postavsky Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Feb 04 15:14:08 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ca16N-0006zX-PZ for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 04 Feb 2017 15:14:07 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:39532 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ca16T-0001po-E6 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 04 Feb 2017 09:14:13 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41157) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ca16M-0001pj-Lr for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 04 Feb 2017 09:14:07 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ca16J-0002rI-FV for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 04 Feb 2017 09:14:06 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:57386) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ca16J-0002r1-Bg for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 04 Feb 2017 09:14:03 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ca16H-0005Sl-Ks for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 04 Feb 2017 09:14:03 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Tino Calancha Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 04 Feb 2017 14:14:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 25618 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 25618-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B25618.148621760820953 (code B ref 25618); Sat, 04 Feb 2017 14:14:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 25618) by debbugs.gnu.org; 4 Feb 2017 14:13:28 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55585 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ca15k-0005Rt-4W for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 04 Feb 2017 09:13:28 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-pf0-f195.google.com ([209.85.192.195]:32967) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ca15i-0005Rg-0u for 25618@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 04 Feb 2017 09:13:26 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-pf0-f195.google.com with SMTP id e4so3597911pfg.0 for <25618@debbugs.gnu.org>; Sat, 04 Feb 2017 06:13:26 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:date:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id:references :user-agent:mime-version; bh=pclU7SqMuspUiHn/WJgnLQrLmogVkzGWX5BWOQi5JKI=; b=HCjNZXK4E+ZJLpG/5xlaK2WHGo7u5fHPixOJHjkIu3jHtZBgPYqRRxm8VyS08hS7Vp 3DDak4NhbY1F7jqOsFMldRep7/eI/e9vbf5hWF3z0mdmKAmyU1oIscr5f2bBDmIWZNFm OdmpIeNLzI0A/lbO7Y6bc3fzsQ5kjdz9s8jSLhCmft0FgtmJv9cF/x1yq/tX1ZXpOSMW kaCfnRQp8NTMe/g1MCgHwHP1MNxBTNebrSASdbH8c0kr4dVS/xbr8z+TtXKXXh7yrIPZ XIguXUXcg5qFtu3grSvGsWuEPCKZ4+2hKaSRwJG8EP1FB7MKcaFyZqBTAHMSJc/Q+taz 6hSA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:date:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id :references:user-agent:mime-version; bh=pclU7SqMuspUiHn/WJgnLQrLmogVkzGWX5BWOQi5JKI=; b=dC7dg5DVaMbgJzWrPHy8/dqOtD9P5iVBZZyrmXf0oxBX8JXpnNFi1y5uhqI0AHE1d4 5bHNn1Qr2h3WENkUaX7ofLLKx+qw030X6vp8CtOKDxV8G29ADTEuRGJEJD+p45k7C4ll DyH7b5PLr3Yu/KfZKwGkxVckxvl7sZ5HLgfZPQH/uDd32vSqNFz5TGd09V70eEh1TN9c 270vk6muEB/lu9yu7SkQ7sJHZaue0LKEtZL7Y3gM8cDo7JJ3084Z7en8FlEDlH8ggN2P DcWYgCyhVTB3aztS1a6jAgBPkFoglqQNAt8gauGK4hcfkmjOlfFZM5jkC71Fe+FPBWvB 96qw== X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXIA0di0MuyfUJLEos1YYy0k5i3xaDqMWSPc0AvqYeB0ysSRQm9mBzXEBLI4u5e5Dg== X-Received: by 10.99.147.18 with SMTP id b18mr2848733pge.22.1486217600015; Sat, 04 Feb 2017 06:13:20 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from calancha-pc (104.81.147.124.dy.bbexcite.jp. [124.147.81.104]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id n8sm49887258pgc.16.2017.02.04.06.13.18 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 04 Feb 2017 06:13:19 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Original-From: Tino Calancha X-X-Sender: calancha@calancha-pc In-Reply-To: X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 208.118.235.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:128951 Archived-At: On Sat, 4 Feb 2017, Noam Postavsky wrote: > On Sat, Feb 4, 2017 at 8:42 AM, Tino Calancha wrote: >> >> Prefer set a numeric limit of seconds than using the word 'few'. >> >> For instance, in my box the test `cl-seq-test-bug24264' in >> test/lisp/emacs-lisp/cl-seq-tests.el >> takes 7 s. >> With an explicit numeric threshold is easier to decide whether this test >> must be tagged as expensive or not. >> >> In following patch i define a few as 2-3 seconds. Other people might >> prefer 4-5 or even higher. >> Please, suggest a proper value to consider a test as expensive. > > Is it worth specifying this so precisely? The time elapsed depends on > the speed of the computer you run it on (also, whether Emacs is > compiled with optimization or not). A test that takes 2 seconds on > your computer might easily take 5 seconds on mine. When i run the test suite, the test mentioned before takes significantly longer than the others. I feel like it could be considered as slightly expensive. After reading 'some few seconds' in CONTRIBUTE i am still in doubt on that. It could be more clear.