> Sorry, this is the syntax department. I think you need to speak to Mr. > Tester in room 104. I think I'll continue arguing in my spare time. :) > > > Clearly extending this through to run-time would add a huge testing > > > infrastructure that would need maintaining, but allowing people to > > > add their own codes to the syntax-checker base might mollify them a > > > bit about the prospect of future language change. > > > > > > Call it the PythOnGuard (TM) database. :-) - if your programs would > > > break you'll be mailed before it's committed to production. > > > > Sounds like some kind of huge test suite. The problem is, there's > > always *something* that breaks... :-( > > > OK. The hugeness of the test suite was precisely what made me stick > to syntax. Do you think quality would benefit by an enlargement of > the test suite to non-distributed code? The quality of what? We need lots more test, probably 40% of the C code isn't covered by the test suite. > Couple it with a few polling buttons from "I wouldn't mind fixing > this breakage" to "I'ma get my gun and come looking for you" and you > might obtain a measure of resistance *from people whose code would > actually be broken*. Clearly this should not necessarily be the > arbiter of development, but it might allow you to tell people whose > code hadn't broken so far to just PythOnGuard it and not complain > until something *did* break. I think it's too simplistic to expect much out of testing a large body of real life code. Much of the expected breakage only shows up when an application is run on real-life data. Maybe running PyChecker on a large body of code would be a good idea, except that then the code would first have to be made PyChecker-clean -- and that's a moving target. > Also good for news releases: "What breaks in this version?" (I can > see Paul Rubin loving that one). It's easy to list the things that could potentially break. It's usually impossible to find whether they are used in a particular body of code without running a thorough test suite *for that code*. --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4