Stewart Stremler wrote:
Rewriting logic, yes. Fixing up formatting, variable names, adding
comments (function, file, and module-level).... ought not introduce
any bugs -- far less, at least, submitting a patch to add functionality.
But you're quite correct that "rewriting" is often a quick way to add
bugs. Been there, seen that, glad I wasn't involved.
Sorry, I don't buy it. Simply rearranging indentation often introduces
bugs.
I'm seeing more and more code that doesn't lend itself to simple tests.
It takes a fair effort just to configure the environment to get the
damn thing to *run*.
Yeah, so? Welcome to development.
Writing code to handle NFS file locking is annoying. Setting up a test
to make it work is even more annoying. If you don't set up that test,
you get buggy NFS file locking.
See rpc.lockd on Linux.
Fortunately, people are starting to get the fact that emulators are good
for setting up testing.
Trying to write a test for that sort of application is a tad daunting.
What do you do when confronted with a program that takes a half-day to
set up before you can get it to run at all?
Suck it up or write buggy code. Your call.
No one said development was always easy.
I'm seeing some hype about automated code-quality tests, and I'm
wondering if we aren't heading towards another annoying fad.
Maybe, but I just consider them to be Lint on Steroids. Fortunately,
most of them are pretty innocuous.
-a
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
