Multiple test case process for fps about hustoj

[GoogleCodeExporter]

FPS doesn't define any special file name for test cases.
That's HUSTOJ's implementation by now using the followed rule :

When Exporting: using 1st *.in file in data dir whose name is not sample.in as 
export
<test_input/test_output>.
When Importing: using test.in/test.out for imported <test_input/test_output>.

If you are using HUSTOJ, that's designed system behavior,by now.

If you are implementing FPS in another OJ system, you can deside what ever 
after the
FPS file is readed, or before the FPS file is written.

Original comment by [email protected] on 11 Apr 2010 at 10:37

[GoogleCodeExporter]

there maybe some mis-understanding here:

FPS is designed to be used for ProblemSet exchange, so there MUST be at least 
one
more test case other than sample included in the FPS to let the receiver of FPS 
to
REALY use it in a WORKING OJ system.

if you want to keep some secret "blind" test case in the sender's OJ, the best 
way is
to keep at least 3 cases in the data dir:
 sample.in test.in x_the_blind_test_data.in

Original comment by [email protected] on 11 Apr 2010 at 11:36

[GoogleCodeExporter]

for x_the_blind_test_data.in:
x consist for single digit number?

Original comment by method4libe on 11 Apr 2010 at 4:47

[GoogleCodeExporter]

just pair of XXX.in and XXX.out

judger is using all the file end with .in to test,
while Export using sample.in and one other file.

let's see the code of exporter

{{{
function getTestFileName($pid,$OJ_DATA) {
        $ret = "";
        $pdir = opendir ( "$OJ_DATA/$pid/" );
        while ( $file = readdir ( $pdir ) ) {
                $pinfo = pathinfo ( $file );
                if ($pinfo ['extension'] == "in" && $pinfo ['basename'] != "sample.in") {
                        $ret = basename ( $pinfo ['basename'], "." . $pinfo
['extension'] );
                        break;
                }
        }
        closedir ( $pdir );
        return $ret;
}



}}}

Original comment by [email protected] on 12 Apr 2010 at 12:27

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I think just one test case file( except sample i/o ) used when a problem export 
to FPS 
format is not a good way. I suggest change FPS format for flexibility.

Like IOI, USACO, NEERC regional, they use multiple test cases files for test 
and 
their's test case for isn't suitable FPS. 

Original comment by method4libe on 13 Apr 2010 at 7:02

[GoogleCodeExporter]

agree,that's just in the list of further developing.

maybe fps2.0 :)

Original comment by [email protected] on 13 Apr 2010 at 1:18

[GoogleCodeExporter]

FPS can store more test cases without a lot change
just add a serial attribute in the test_input/ouput element like 

<test_input sno="1" >....

but obviously add a new element of <test_case> will be a better choice:

<!ELEMENT test_case (test_input,test_output)>

which one would you like ?

i might do that next week or so, would you like to try some coding.

i hope we can make our code compact with the old version

Original comment by [email protected] on 13 Apr 2010 at 3:06

[GoogleCodeExporter]

now it's enabled with r198

and should be compatible with the previous version which dealing with 
single-testcase

Original comment by [email protected] on 14 Apr 2010 at 1:16

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Original comment by [email protected] on 5 Jun 2010 at 4:52

• Changed state: Fixed