Re: Proposal for built in tests.

[Robert T. Short]

Roger.  If you don't like something I do, just reject the change.  Such 
things help me understand your philosophy and in the meantime I learn 
the code base a little better.

This won't happen quickly but is something I can do when I have just a 
few minutes to work on octave.  I have a couple of nasty little OOP bugs 
to track down so when I have real time I will work on those.

Bob


John W. Eaton wrote:
> On 23-Jun-2009, Robert T. Short wrote:
>
> | OK.  I am not sure I totally agree, but as I said, I am not sure my way 
> | is really better either.
> | 
> | Unless someone objects, I will go ahead on an as-time-permits basis and 
> | move tests to where they seem to belong.
>
> No objection from me.  I'd focus on moving tests that are obviously
> for individual functions and not worry too much about tests for core
> language features (things like syntax, indexing, for loops, etc.).
>
> Thanks,
>
> jwe
>
>
>