On Mon, 29 Jan 2001 10:30:17 -0500, Guido van Rossum <guido@digicool.com> wrote: > It's good to test conformance to the language definition, but this is > also a regression test for the implementation. The "accidents of the > implementation" definitely need to be tested. E.g. if we decide that > repr(s) uses \n rather than \012 or \x0a, this should be tested too. > The language definition gives the implementer a choice here; but once > the implementer has made a choice, it's good to have a test that tests > that this choice is implemented correctly. I agree. > Perhaps there should be several parts to the regression test, > e.g. language conformance, library conformance, platform-specific > features, and implementation conformance? This sounds like a good idea...probably for the 2.2 timeline. -- Moshe Zadka <sig@zadka.site.co.il> This is a signature anti-virus. Please stop the spread of signature viruses! Fingerprint: 4BD1 7705 EEC0 260A 7F21 4817 C7FC A636 46D0 1BD6
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