I think we should revisit this as a topic of discussion - At the moment, this would be a blocker to upgrading my kotest version, but more importantly its a bit of a blocker to properly setting up edgecases - theres an incentive to just ignore them so that our tests don't balloon out into the hundreds of thousands of iterations. What do you think @sam and @mitch?

@sam i think we touched upon this topic a while back

that link doesn't load for me

So basically the problem is, with arity k where k > some n, the edgecases explode and it all becomes silly

yeah, which makes sense i guess.. at a certain point you’d have an exponential

right

😆 that’s a big number, and yes

but not if it means the first 20000 tests are all edgecases

i wonder if we should revisit the probabilistic edgecases idea

yes

Yeah. Edgecases are definitely a useful concept, and if Kotest peppered them (at a greater frequency) than random values, I think we'd get a lot of the value without the downsides of a huge test space

that makes me think that a useful idea might be, edge cases are just included in the sample values, and each time a value is requested, we randomly pick either an edge case or a truely random value

i’m gonna try to research again how scalacheck does their thing

Would you ever want a rank other than "edgecase - try more often" and "truly random"?

I've looked into scalacheck, it's quite basic (imo)

I can't see a case where saying that say, -1 is more likely to be a problem than 0

The best one is the haskell one that only does edgecases, hedgehog or something

i haven’t used that

My idea of edgecases @rpillay was that -1 / 1 / 0 is more likely to throw errors than 2342342

Yeah, I get that (and agree - edge cases like that are more likely to cause problems). I thought you were suggesting ranking them further - which I don't see a use for

I'm wondering if we just say, pick 50/50 (or whatever) from an edge case vs a real random value

Nice. i think we can improve this further but i think we can make that work with the current ingredients. One question, say if we implement this - would that mean: • a) we discard the idea of cartesian product and go all in to probabilistic or • b) we keep the cartesian product but give users a way to configure various behaviours?

I'm open to anything

on ranking maybe that’s the next iteration of the feature

I'm happy to release 5.0 if we come up with something great but breaking

with probabilistic edgecases it’s possible to do it with 100% backward compatibility

Right

I'd be in favour of a) discard cartesian products. Mostly because it seems unlikely that you'd need the configurability. There seem to be other options within Kotest if you need that sort of thing - exhaustives instead of arbs, for example (?)

hmm yeah that’s a good point, i haven’t been playing too much with exhaustives

👍 I'll raise the issue

awesome! thanks @rpillay

I saw the PR email, and I'll review it as soon as I can. I know it'll be good 🙂

:awesome:

you’re awesome Sam, my inbox is a bit unworldly to look at, i need to do some spring cleaning to get rid of the far too many junks