That would definitely take the confidence level in the tests up quite a ways. Not to the 100% mathematical proofs have, but a lot higher than in-the-dark stabbing.
Remember - unit tests aren't meant to prove the algorithm works; they're meant to determine the adherence of the implementation to the algorithm. So, even if you use all the cases in the proof of the algorithm as tests of the implementation, you still haven't proven the validity of the code like you can prove the validity of the algorithm.
------
We are the carpenters and bricklayers of the Information Age.
Then there are Damian modules.... *sigh* ... that's not about being less-lazy -- that's about being on some really good drugs -- you know, there is no spoon. - flyingmoose
I shouldn't have to say this, but any code, unless otherwise stated, is untested
In reply to Re: Theorem proving and Unit testing
by dragonchild
in thread Theorem proving and Unit testing
by stvn
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |