Yeah, I love pending too. but it doesn't help me get a sense of the
state of a suite before I start. now it's part of my practice to go in
and find out how much is commented out.
David,
three concerns with pending as an option:
a. it won't help the people who think it's ok to comment out whole
t
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 1:55 PM, James Cox wrote:
> so yes, pending is ok, but a second keyword "broken" might be nicer,
> which would act the same but output different info.--
>
There is a block form of pending. It actually executes the contents of the
block, but outputs as a pending test -- u
AFAIK, there is no framework or tool that can prevent people from doing
stupid things.
I actually only use pending for one thing: in the morning it reminds me
where I was heading the prior evening.
On Jul 24, 2012 1:57 PM, "James Cox" wrote:
> Yeah, I love pending too. but it doesn't help me ge
I'd suggest adding a coverage ratchet to your build. It's the most
effective (if occasionally annoying) tool when dealing with such
situations. Some assumptions:
* You need a CI server and everyone's using CCMenu/Buildnotify so the
team knows as soon as the build breaks
* You don't have a brittle
