Property based testing

If some Admin just deleted this, please mention so I can distinguish it from a software fail. :slight_smile:

To make it short, I think that property based testing can help Monogame:

I can post other sources which I find helpful, once its cleared that those are not the reason for the previous deletion.

Thanks :blush:

Didn’t delete it, your behaviour came across as spam, so I moved it to a discussion area, Can you explain what your point with this post is? and how it relates at all to this community?

How does it help MonoGame? you just point to a video, explain how you feel it can help instead of relying on wasting our time?


If it comes across as me sounding annoyed, don’t worry, just questioning your motives :stuck_out_tongue:

Well, is there code involved in Monogame? :slight_smile:

I just saw in your changelog that you do unit tests, so I thought you might want to switch to something sane. :slight_smile:

Spam is by the way often associated with advertising of products for which you have to pay for and (other) unrelated tests.

I never ever came across the definition that Spam is something that actual relates to the topic and does not advice to buy something :smiley:

sane? I don’t understand you so much, so I should probably avoid your posts, to me you come across as arrogant but I guess it is a translation issue…

Good luck!

This is beginning to sound like a sales pitch. “I just saw in your changelog that you do unit tests” is akin to a hawker approaching me on the street and saying “I see you’ve got two legs” and trying to sell me a new pair of formal shoes when I’m wearing joggers.

Trying to get developers to write unit tests that are simple to understand is difficult enough. Asking them to change to something that requires a lot more effort to learn and understand is a very big ask and is just adding another barrier to getting good tests in place. I’m an experienced developer, and having had a look at one of the presentations you linked to, I still don’t understand property-based testing. Probably best described by Jessica Kerr’s introduction in her talk, describing property-based testing as “…a pain in the butt. It’s really hard.”

Joining a community and proposing a big change such as this is not the best approach. Join the community, get to know the project and how and why it does the things it does, then understand the implications of change. Well over a thousand tests would need to be ported (try to find someone willing to take that on, good luck) and for example, a large number of our tests are visual. We have a reference image generated in XNA and compare our visual output from the exact same input to the XNA image. That doesn’t fit property-based testing at all given what I have seen of it.


Nobody here suggested that you should rewrite all your tests and I, as a newbie understand how they work. Its of course more effort to write them, while as you can see in the second part of Hughes presentation is it worth.

I posted this one here exactly for one reason: That people with awareness about the code base can consider promoting it.

Unit tests are simply, when you look on the cost/effect ratio not that effective as property based testing, as my material shows.

Tons of other developers think the same and they have arguments:
You might consider to hear what they say.

Nice idea about this visual testing, which sources can you recommend to study it?