On 4/8/2012 4:56 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 4/8/12 6:11 PM, David Nadlinger wrote:
The thing is that some parts of Thrift are rather metaprogramming-heavy,
and these parts at the same time are quite well covered by its test
suite. Thus, it does rather well in finding related DMD regressions – at
least I don't recall a recent release where this hasn't been the case.
Interesting. I wonder whether it's worth making building and testing Thrift a
part of the normal benchmarks.
My experience is we are far, far, far better off having a test suite composed of
isolated test cases than some large, complex library. The reason is because if
the library fails, it's simply hell for anyone trying to distill the bug out of
it. Also, large libraries give the illusion of coverage, but in reality tend to
be some small subset repeated over and over. And they add a lot of time to the
running of the test suite.
_______________________________________________
dmd-beta mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta
