Unit test 150

[yuecheng-yu]

Current situation

Refer to #150

Release Notes

A unit testing program using GoogleTest to test get_pk2cc is implemented and built. It allows user defined deformation gradient as input to check the correctness of get_pk2cc (material model) by comparing the output stress and tangent tensors.

Documentation

None

Testing

To be tested

Code of Conduct & Contributing Guidelines

• I agree to follow the Code of Conduct and Contributing Guidelines.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 97.01493% with 2 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 62.90%. Comparing base (b99e12e) to head (2bf104c).
Report is 6 commits behind head on main.

Files	Patch %	Lines
tests/unitTests/test.h	94.87%	2 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #198      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   57.50%   62.90%   +5.40%     
==========================================
  Files         103      105       +2     
  Lines       26964    27214     +250     
==========================================
+ Hits        15505    17119    +1614     
+ Misses      11459    10095    -1364     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[mrp089]

@ktbolt, I'll look over this PR and after @yuecheng-yu and I have iterated over it, I'll assign you as a reviewer

[mrp089]

Thank you for making the unit tests work, @yuecheng-yu! I added a couple of comments on how to clean up the code and make it more modular. Please have a look and let me know if you have any questions.

[mrp089]

Very nice idea to use a fixture! Do you think we could use a Mock object for things like com_mod and dmn?

[yuecheng-yu]

Yes, I think it's possible. When I compared mock object with test fixture, I felt that while mock object is more ideal for unit testing, it may be harder to use for our current structures of material model. Because each type of model has completely different parameters/classes and also the parameters used in get_pk2cc such as C10/C01 are different from the input file (Elastic Modules, etc.), I think it could be a better timing to use Mock method for comprehensive unit testing after we have a new material model interface. Meanwhile, I personally really like the fixture thing which can rerun the setup code, which I think is the main reason I picked fixture to try first, please forget my previous blah blah. I'll try to write a GMock frame for nHK first to see how it works.

[ktbolt]

@mrp089 @yuecheng-yu I feel that there is too much discussion here that is not included in the Issue. I think we should have code reviews before people do a PR.

[mrp089]

True, but unfortunately, creating a (draft) PR is necessary to get the code review function in GitHub (which nicely lets multiple people interact on the code). And it's better to have a discussion in the PR than not having a discussion. The discussion is still easily accessible since the merged commit is linked to the PR (and indirectly to the issue).

[yuecheng-yu]

@mrp089 I created an Isotropic material class for unit test, wrapped the mock class inside the test class. So the users only need to define material parameters, input deformation gradient, and reference solutions at the testing interface (test.cpp).

[mrp089]

Nicely done, @yuecheng-yu! This is looking good, just some minor cleanups.