On Mon, Jul 11, 2005 at 07:43:24PM -0400, David Golden wrote: > I think this is a coverage vs correctness distinction. The idea that I > was trying to convey is that while these expressions use a boolean > operator for a shortcut, they aren't really about truth vs. falsity of > the overall expression, *except* when they are being used as part of a > conditional statement. From a coverage perspective, what should matter > in "my $foo = $p || $q" is that $foo takes on the values of both $p and > $q at some point during the test suite, not whether or not $foo takes on > both true and false values -- coverage of that condition should be > checked when $foo is used in another expression.
You're right, I was thinking about this problem backwards. -- Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pobox.com/~schwern Ahh email, my old friend. Do you know that revenge is a dish that is best served cold? And it is very cold on the Internet!
