On Thu, 19 Feb 2026 19:12:12 GMT, Michael Strauß <[email protected]> wrote:

>> to ensure the behavior of adjacent values, as it is not covered just by the 
>> random numbers (what is the probability of selecting two adjacent random 
>> values?)
>
> Hmm... but why? It seems to me that you're suggesting to test some kind of 
> edge case, but I don't understand what the significance of closely adjacent 
> values is in this test. In this test, we parse random number strings with 
> both algorithms, and compare their bitwise equivalence. Since the numbers 
> were random to begin with, a number right next to it is equally random. I 
> don't think this adds any relevant test coverage.

you are bringing a non-trivial algorithm, and I would like it well tested.

in fact, I would suggest adding one more test for binary patterns such as 
0x0...01, 0x0...10, ... 0xff..ff, 0xff..fe - walking ones, walking zeros, 
filling ones/zeros from one end, from the other end, 0xaa/0x55.  this is 
different from random fuzzing but I feel is necessary simply because the search 
space is just too great (~2^64)

the test patterns would be procedurally generated, then for each pattern use
long -> Double -> String -> parse -> compare with Double

-------------

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/2069#discussion_r2829748990

Reply via email to