>Net result is Good. > >[If it wasn't clear, thanks for this, thanks for all the other good work >you've >done on parrot]
Thank you. >Seriously though - is it possible to automate testing how many ops don't >have tests? That way we could have a test that looked for untested ops, and >failed if any weren't tested. I'm sure someone could hack up something non-sophisticated which at least does a grep of the test suite based off of the op list. I'm probably the main culprit of committing ops without tests, however I always run my own tests on them. >I'm not suggesting that we do this all the time, but it might be a good rule >for any official release - for release all ops must have tests. I agree. Before next release (and each subsequent one) this would be worth addressing. -Melvin
