Re: GSoC Proposal 2
Matthew Toseland <toad-EI5O+8PHWbJeeLb3ft/[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.network.freenet.technical |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Tue, Mar 20, 2007 at 06:06:01PM +0100, Sback wrote: > Florent Daignière (NextGen$) wrote: > > * Sback <sback-vy/[email protected]> [2007-03-20 15:44:43]: > > > >> Deliverables: > >> * Create specific method tests with a fine granularity on most used code > > > > I'm not sure we want tests to focus on the most used code : if it breaks > > we will realize it soon enough... My concern here is that he may write a whole load of tests and then we'll go and rewrite that section of code (e.g. when rewriting the congestion control/retransmission/link crypto code) and the tests won't compile any more, or will test things that we no longer use. > > > You are right. > In my opinion tests does not only permit to detect a bug presence, but > also to find in a easier way. In other words: if you run a bad code, > you will see that there is a problem, but it could be not so easy to > identify it. > Tests help in this situation. > And usually most used parts are the most changed (for bugfix, code > refactoring, performance improvement) > and stressed. So new developers would be really aided by a Test Suite > for those parts. True. > These are the reasons that conduct me to concentrate on most used parts > of code. > > But of course I will appreciate every suggestion about this point! > > nextgens : Which parts do you think need good testing? > I could consider them important in addition to most > used parts! > > Thank you, > Sback _______________________________________________ Tech mailing list [email protected] http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tech
signature.asc
(application/pgp-signature, 189 B)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFGAB/JA9rUluQ9pFARAvtVAJ40Qp1FY/xNATOGKjTXjVdjXMnbGACfXtcB juQBglYYck4E+FH696c+v/c= =vBMG -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----