Skip to content

test: exclude failing aimes test cases #1407

New issue

Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? # to your account

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: develop
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

barendgehrels
Copy link
Collaborator

addresses: #1403

The Aimes test cases are a set of complex real life features which are not yet totally robust for geographic buffers.

addresses: boostorg#1403

The Aimes test cases are a set of complex real life features which
are not yet totally robust for geographic buffers.
@barendgehrels barendgehrels self-assigned this May 10, 2025
@@ -29,6 +29,8 @@ endforeach()
foreach(item IN ITEMS
buffer_point_geo
buffer_polygon_geo
buffer_linestring
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This one was fine without adaptions

@@ -29,6 +29,8 @@ endforeach()
foreach(item IN ITEMS
buffer_point_geo
buffer_polygon_geo
buffer_linestring
buffer_linestring_geo
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

For this case I had to exclude 5 cases.

I will investigate them later this year, after integrating some other enhancements (robust side, #1404, ...)

@@ -149,6 +173,8 @@ int test_main(int, char* [])
test_linestring<bg::strategy::andoyer, true, bg::model::point<default_test_type, 2, bg::cs::geographic<bg::degree> > >();
test_linestring<bg::strategy::thomas, true, bg::model::point<default_test_type, 2, bg::cs::geographic<bg::degree> > >();

test_linestring_aimes<bg::strategy::andoyer, true, bg::model::point<default_test_type, 2, bg::cs::geographic<bg::degree> > >();
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is not run for thomas for speed and complexity reasons

// Cases where the algorithm is still failing.
std::set<int> const skip_cases_round_round{17, 22, 38, 181, 196};
std::set<int> const skip_cases_round_flat{17, 22, 38, 103, 196};
std::set<int> const skip_cases_miter_flat{17, 18, 22, 38, 103, 196};
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

196 was already skipped (in another way, see below).
Two other cases were already skipped but are now fine.

Copy link
Member

@vissarion vissarion left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks, I am ok with merging, but should we leave the issue open for tracking?

# for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? # to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants