[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] more on the merge-fest
From: |
Tom Lord |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] more on the merge-fest |
Date: |
Tue, 25 Nov 2003 12:56:08 -0800 (PST) |
> From: Mark Thomas <address@hidden>
> The "best" way is for two different people to write the code and the test
> suite simultaneously and independently from each other (from a previously
> agreed requirements specification), and run them against each other. If
> it breaks, then either one could be wrong and you have to go from there.
I think that's really key, especially if you form abstractions from
it.
There's nothing special about tests that makes them any less
susceptible to bugs than anything else. It's just the separation of
effort to produce redundant expressions that you expect to agree that
counts.
-t
- [Gnu-arch-users] more on the merge-fest, Tom Lord, 2003/11/25
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] more on the merge-fest, zander, 2003/11/25
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] more on the merge-fest, Mark Thomas, 2003/11/25
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] more on the merge-fest,
Tom Lord <=
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] more on the merge-fest, Tom Lord, 2003/11/25
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] more on the merge-fest, Karel Gardas, 2003/11/25
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] more on the merge-fest, Andrew Suffield, 2003/11/25
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] more on the merge-fest, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2003/11/25
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] more on the merge-fest, Florian Weimer, 2003/11/25
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] more on the merge-fest, Samuel A. Falvo II, 2003/11/25
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] more on the merge-fest, Andrew Suffield, 2003/11/25
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] more on the merge-fest, Charles Duffy, 2003/11/25
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] more on the merge-fest, Samuel A. Falvo II, 2003/11/25
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] more on the merge-fest, Andrew Suffield, 2003/11/25