It's not the JE test suite. That doesn't rely on the details of ?. .
But there is user code, outside our control, that depends on the exact
behavior of ?. .
I know, because when I modified ? a while back to speed it up, I
included the changes in ?. too and had to withdraw them under the hail
of dead cats that ensued. Now ?. uses its own separate code and will
never change.
Really, the workaround is pretty easy - taking much less time than we've
spent on posts about it.
Henry Rich
On 7/19/2020 12:01 PM, Raul Miller wrote:
Well... I think we can agree that if ?. were replaced with 0: that
that would not be random enough.
So there has to be a better way of talking about this issue.
If the current test suite is looking for hard coded results from ?. --
and I think it does -- then of course changing the ?. implementation
would require careful update of the test suite, and this would become
an ongoing future issue if the underlying implementation changed. So I
think that that level of effort is what you are talking about??
Thanks,
--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
