subtest-isolation

name	subtest-isolation
description	Create minimal subtests to isolate and fix complex bugs. Use when a test fails and the issue is buried in complexity.

Subtest Isolation Methodology

When a test fails with complex output or multiple issues, create a minimal subtest to isolate and fix ONE specific problem at a time.

When to Use This Approach

Use subtest isolation when:

• ✅ Test has multiple moving parts and you can't identify the root cause
• ✅ Visual diff shows one specific element is wrong among many
• ✅ You need to add debug output but the full test is too noisy
• ✅ The bug is structural (wrong algorithm) not just a value mismatch
• ✅ You've tried quick fixes and they didn't work

Don't use for:

• ❌ Simple value mismatches you can debug directly
• ❌ Obvious typos or off-by-one errors
• ❌ Issues you can already see the cause of

The Process

1. Identify the Specific Problem

Look at the failing test output and pinpoint EXACTLY what's wrong:

• Which element is mispositioned?
• Which calculation is producing wrong values?
• Which feature is broken?

Example from test45:

Problem identified: Bottom box has all text overlapping incorrectly.
"center" text appearing at the very top instead of middle.

2. Create Minimal Reproduction

Create a new test file (e.g., test45b.pikchr) with ONLY the problematic element:

# test45b.pikchr - isolate the bottom box issue
box "rjust" rjust above "center" center "ljust" ljust above \
    "rjust" rjust below "ljust" ljust below big big

Key principles:

• ✅ Include ONLY what's needed to reproduce the bug
• ✅ Remove all unrelated elements (other boxes, arrows, files, etc.)
• ✅ Keep the exact attributes that trigger the bug
• ✅ Name it <original>b.pikchr for clarity

3. Verify It Fails the Same Way

Run the subtest and confirm it shows the SAME bug:

cargo run --example simple -- vendor/pikchr-c/tests/test45b.pikchr
# OR
mcp__pikru-test__run_pikru_test test45b

Check that:

• The specific problem reproduces
• The failure mode is identical
• You haven't accidentally "fixed" it by simplifying

4. Add Debug Output

Add targeted debug output to understand what's happening:

eprintln!("[SLOT HEIGHT] text='{}' slot={:?} font_scale={} charht={} h={}",
    text.value, slot, text.font_scale(), charht, h);

eprintln!("[Y OFFSET] text='{}' slot={:?} calc=[{}] y_offset={} final_y={}",
    positioned_text.value, slot, offset_calc, y_offset, center.y + svg_y_offset);

Debug output best practices:

• Use eprintln! so it goes to stderr (doesn't corrupt SVG output)
• Use clear prefixes like [SLOT HEIGHT], [Y OFFSET] for easy grepping
• Show both inputs and outputs of calculations
• Include the actual formula/calculation being performed
• Show intermediate values, not just final results

5. Run and Analyze

Run the subtest and analyze the debug output:

cargo run --example simple -- vendor/pikchr-c/tests/test45b.pikchr 2>&1 | grep '\[SLOT'

Look for:

• Wrong values (expected vs actual)
• Wrong assignments (text getting wrong slot)
• Wrong calculations (formula producing wrong result)
• Missing or unexpected branches taken

Example output that revealed the bug:

[SLOT HEIGHT] text='center' slot=Above2 font_scale=1 charht=0.14 h=0.14

→ BUG FOUND: "center" text assigned to Above2 instead of Center!

6. Compare with C Implementation

Run the C implementation on the same subtest:

vendor/pikchr-c/pikchr --svg-only vendor/pikchr-c/tests/test45b.pikchr | grep '<text'

Compare:

• Element positions (x, y coordinates)
• Slot assignments (if you can infer them)
• Final output structure

Example comparison:

C output:    <text y="38.16" ...>center</text>
Rust output: <text y="12.24" ...>center</text>

→ Confirms the bug: Rust placing center text way too high

7. Fix the Bug

Based on debug output and comparison:

1. Identify the root cause
2. Make the minimal fix needed
3. Don't over-engineer - fix THIS bug only

Example fix:

// BUG: wasn't checking t.center
else if t.center {
    Some(TextVSlot::Center)  // ← FIX: explicitly assign Center slot
}

8. Verify Subtest Passes

Run the subtest again - it should now MATCH:

mcp__pikru-test__run_pikru_test test45b

Expect:

{"test_name":"test45b","status":"match","comparison":{"ssim":1.0, ...}}

9. Remove Debug Output

Clean up the debug statements you added:

// Remove all the eprintln! statements
// Keep the code clean for production

10. Verify Original Test Passes

Run the original test to confirm the fix works in context:

mcp__pikru-test__run_pikru_test test45

If it still fails:

• There may be MULTIPLE bugs (repeat the process)
• The subtest wasn't complete enough (add more context)
• There's an interaction bug (debug the interaction)

If it passes:

• ✅ Bug is fixed!
• ✅ Verify a few other tests still pass
• ✅ Commit with clear message about the fix

11. Keep or Remove Subtest

Keep the subtest if:

• It tests an important edge case worth preserving
• It could prevent regression
• It's a good minimal example of a feature

Remove the subtest if:

• It's purely diagnostic (already covered by original test)
• It duplicates existing test coverage

Example: test45 → test45b

Original problem:

• test45 had complex diagram with files, arrows, boxes
• Bottom box had text positioning bug
• Couldn't see what was wrong amid all the other elements

Subtest creation:

# test45b.pikchr - just the problematic box
box "rjust" rjust above "center" center "ljust" ljust above \
    "rjust" rjust below "ljust" ljust below big big

Debug output revealed:

[SLOT HEIGHT] text='center' slot=Above2 ...  ← WRONG! Should be Center

Root cause found:

• center text attribute wasn't being handled in slot assignment
• Text marked "center" was treated as unassigned
• Got first free slot (Above2) instead of Center slot

Fix applied:

// Added center field to PositionedText
// Handle TextAttr::Center in parsing
// Check t.center when assigning initial slots

Result:

• test45b: MATCH (SSIM 1.0)
• test45: MATCH (SSIM 1.0)
• Bug completely fixed

Tips and Tricks

Effective Debug Output

Show the calculation:

eprintln!("calc=[Above: 0.5*{} + 0.5*{} = {}]", hc, ha1, offset);

Track state transitions:

eprintln!("[BEFORE] slot={:?} y_offset={}", slot, y_offset);
// ... calculation ...
eprintln!("[AFTER] y_offset={} final_y={}", y_offset, final_y);

Use structured prefixes:

[SLOT HEIGHT]   // For slot height calculations
[Y OFFSET]      // For y-coordinate calculations
[ASSIGNMENT]    // For slot assignments
[FINAL]         // For final values

Iterative Refinement

If the first subtest doesn't reproduce the bug:

1. Add back one element at a time
2. Check what's needed to trigger the issue
3. Keep the minimal set that shows the problem

Multiple Bugs

If you find multiple bugs:

1. Fix them ONE at a time
2. Create separate subtests for each
3. Name them test45b, test45c, etc.
4. Verify each fix independently

When It's Still Not Clear

If debug output doesn't reveal the issue:

1. Add even MORE detailed logging
2. Compare execution flow with C (use C debug output if available)
3. Check if the bug is earlier in the pipeline (parsing vs rendering)
4. Verify your assumptions about how the code should work

Checklist

• Identified specific problem in failing test
• Created minimal subtest reproducing ONLY that problem
• Verified subtest fails the same way as original
• Added targeted debug output
• Analyzed debug output to find root cause
• Compared with C implementation output
• Made minimal fix addressing root cause
• Verified subtest passes (MATCH status)
• Removed debug output
• Verified original test passes
• Verified other tests still pass
• Decided whether to keep or remove subtest

Remember

The goal is laser focus:

• Isolate ONE bug
• Understand it completely
• Fix it correctly
• Move on

Not:

• Fix multiple bugs at once
• Add features while debugging
• Over-engineer the solution
• Leave debug code in production