Thread: [Kotlin] Random Permutation

Originally Posted by Tyluur

Code:

 @[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
	fun test1000() = testArray(fillArray(1000))
	
 @[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
	fun test100() = testArray(fillArray(100))
	
 @[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
	fun test10() = testArray(fillArray(10))
	
 @[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
	fun test5() = testArray(fillArray(5))
	
 @[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
	fun test2() = testArray(fillArray(2))
	
 @[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
	fun test1() = testArray(fillArray(1))

I would've used one function to test for a dynamic array randomization.

How would that add any additional test coverage compared to what I have?

Originally Posted by Velocity

my brain oxygen flow would stop sooner

engrish bro what r u tryna say

Originally Posted by Gluon

How would that add any additional test coverage compared to what I have?

That's one way you could improve the tests. Another way would be to test the application of this. Perhaps extend this to collections which are indexable and extend that mf scope.

Originally Posted by Velocity

I'D DIE QUICKER, MY BROTHER

didn't think you'd also browse r-s strapped... can't trust no mf these days dawg

ask me bout my last year. i gotta keep that mf thang on me.

ot - u gonna drop that mf perl code or is jonathan gonna do it for u

Originally Posted by Tyluur

engrish bro what r u tryna say



That's one way you could improve the tests. Another way would be to test the application of this. Perhaps extend this to collections which are indexable and extend that mf scope.

Would be useless to post unit tests of applications from my framework source code which users of this snippet wont have access to. And that's exactly what those extension functions are "doing" isn't it? They're extension functions on built in collections classes. I didn't have to post the Random class either but cbf with the "Class not found io.insignia.api.utils.Random" posts.

Originally Posted by Gluon

Would be useless to post unit tests of applications from my framework source code which users of this snippet wont have access to. And that's exactly what those extension functions are "doing" isn't it? They're extension functions on built in collections classes. I didn't have to post the Random class either but cbf with the "Class not found io.insignia.api.utils.Random" posts.

The various test cases you have are arguably useless as well. What's the thought process behind them?

Originally Posted by Tyluur

The various test cases you have are arguably useless as well. What's the thought process behind them?

To ensure that its actually generating a unique set of random indices that cover the entire scope of the array/collection you're using them on. That no indices are missing/duplicated/wrong.