On sexta-feira, 14 de dezembro de 2012 17.43.55, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> this is a self-contradicting interpretation. a minimal fully functional
> change is not splittable (i.e., it's atomic). therefore no part of that
> change can legally exist on its own (i.e., satisfy the criterion of
> being atomic), as otherwise the complete change would not be atomic to
> start with.

Again, it's a question of how you define "atomic". I don't include the 
criterion of being testable.

-- 
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
  Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

_______________________________________________
Development mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Reply via email to