Tim Peters wrote:
More tests would be appreciated! Since nobody looks at most of this code most of the time, tests are the only reliable defense we have. Jim "confessed" last week that he deliberately didn't write TmpStore tests originally because TmpStore is "an internal implementation detail". You'll note that the new test I added didn't mention TmpStore either, except in comments. For that matter, the new test didn't use FileStorage either (it used MinimalMemoryStorage, which is a bare-bones storage used only in the test suite). Tests specifically against TmpStore would be welcome.
I wouldn't call what I said a "confession". I still do think that TmpStore *is* an internal implementation detail and that tests of actual public functionality are more important. I've seen lots of cases in the past where internal components were tested directly with the following disadvantages: - test effort was wasted unnecessarily when implementation decisions were changed, - It was often hard to tell which test tested essential functionality and which tested implementation accidents, this making refactoring more difficult. I think tests should be writted for real external apis. I think testing internal implementation details is almost always waste of scarce resources. Jim -- Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered! CTO (540) 361-1714 http://www.python.org Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com http://www.zope.org _______________________________________________ For more information about ZODB, see the ZODB Wiki: http://www.zope.org/Wikis/ZODB/ ZODB-Dev mailing list - ZODB-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zodb-dev