I'm going to repeat what chromatic said (even though I've deleted his message)
On Wed, Nov 06, 2002 at 09:57:58PM +0100, Angel Faus wrote: > - Finish the details that may be not complete in the Apocalypses > (there are plenty of them) write specifications of all the detailed bits as regression tests. code is usually more tight in its definition of things than English Also, if I remember The Mythical Man Month correctly, Brookes said that either the user manual or the spec can be definitive, but not both - the other must be a derivative. I see no reason why this doesn't also apply to specs vs regression tests. So either we have the definitive docs that define all the details of the language, or we have the regression tests that define all the details. I know what I'd prefer. Mainly because I type make test and let the computer check that the implementation is correct (while I make myself a cup of tea by hand). I prefer this to checking by hand and machine brewed tea. Nicholas Clark
