Please do not reply to this email- if you want to comment on the bug, go to the URL shown below and enter your comments there.
Changed by [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bugzilla.ximian.com/show_bug.cgi?id=77663 --- shadow/77663 2006-03-02 13:29:40.000000000 -0500 +++ shadow/77663.tmp.27728 2006-03-03 03:19:17.000000000 -0500 @@ -49,6 +49,15 @@ No need for a test case (if you don't already have one). I just wondered as this part of the source code is fairly old and has been extensively tested in the past - which means our tests aren't enough (hence why I was curious about the test case ;-). Thanks. + +------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-03-03 03:19 ------- +I'd suspect the same kind of testing isuse as with bug#77432: a small +test suite of a single piece of code, even if provided, usually only +makes the method receive one kind of arguments. When the input either +varies or has passed several abstraction layers, new effects occur: +receiving only a small portion of a byte[] buffer at once, the peer +feeding data faster or slower than the test driver, different method +calling sequence, etc. _______________________________________________ mono-bugs maillist - [email protected] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-bugs
