Robert Kern wrote: > On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 11:12 AM, Travis E. Oliphant > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> Besides, having a "test-per-checkin" is not the proper mapping in my >> mind. I'd rather see whole check-ins devoted to testing large pieces >> of code rather than spend all unit-test foo on a rigid policy of >> "regression" testing each check-in. >> > > Stéfan is proposing "test-per-bugfix", not "test-per-checkin". That is > eminently feasible. You need to do some kind of testing to be sure > that you actually fixed the problem. It is simply *not* *that* *hard* > to write that in unit test form. > That is not true. You *don't* need to do testing to be sure you actually fixed the problem in some cases.... Looking at the code is enough. Like the case we are talking about.
-Travis _______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@scipy.org http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
