Follow-up Comment #7, bug #64772 (project groff):
> I think calling code review "speculative" in this context - as
> if systematic testing were somehow better - is not helpful.
Fair point. I chose that term based more on your wording "I have little doubt
that it is full of bugs," which to my reading implied you hadn't identified
any specific bugs (which I realize wasn't your goal at the time anyway) but
had presumed the presence of many based on the overall code quality. This
would technically make the claim speculative even if it's likely accurate.
In any case, you seem to have looked at the code more closely than any other
current developer, so I'm inclined to give your analysis more weight.
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?64772>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/
