Re: QA Tests: Python vs C++

[Josh Morman]

Jeff,

When tests are done in C++, they also must be compiled, which adds to the overall gnuradio compilation time.  In-tree the c++ tests are reserved mainly for testing the really low level like buffers.

I agree with you that an all c++ target makes debugging easy, but you can launch the python flowgraphs with the GDB debugger using program: "/usr/bin/python3" and args: /path/to/the/qa_xxx.py. 

Josh

On Mon, Mar 7, 2022 at 8:37 AM Jeff S <e070832@hotmail.com> wrote:

I started writing some QA tests which were missing for some blocks I’m working on (in maint-3.9).  I decided to compare using Python vs using C++ when building new tests.  When I started looking into the C++ tests, it seems that there are not a lot of examples around, so I started wondering why people may stick to Python over C++.

 

I found Python quicker to code and easier to see what’s being tested, but C++ would run the same test as the Python much quicker (according to the time output from make test).  Writing in C++ also gives me the ability to run Visual Studio Code in debug easier and target sections of code under test, which is a very nice feature.  Visual Studio Code seems to have problems with mixed languages under its visual debugging.

 

Are there other aspects of Python for QA tests that I’m missing as to why it’s the preferred method?  I’m indifferent as to the tool used because I’ll use whatever gets the job done, so I’m not trying to make this a language pro/con question.

 

Thanks,

Jeff