On Fri, 2008-04-18 at 06:26 -0700, Andy Dougherty via RT wrote:
> > + my $these_tests = $steps_tests{$temp[0]}{$temp[1]}
> > + or croak "No tests exist for configure step $step";
>
> Thank you. That's definitely an improvement. I know I wasted a lot
> of time trying to figure out what the previous failure mode meant.
>
> Still, why croak? Is the lack of a test really so fatal that it should be
> impossible to Configure or build parrot -- even if you're just starting to
> develop the configure step?
>
> This seems to me more of the level of a coding standard warning, not a
> fatal error.
I *completely* agree -- very similar thoughts went through my head the
first couple times I watched Configure explode on me in those very
circumstances.
I chose 'croak' because I wanted to have at least some improvement over
the current behavior, and getting *any* patch accepted was more
important than details; an error message that would trigger my memory
was at least better than one that would just confuse me. I figured the
best way to get a patch accepted quickly was to change no actual
*behavior* -- the original code died so the patched version dies as well
-- but merely change the particular words that were displayed when death
occured.
Honestly, James Keenan's complaint threw me for a loop -- I had never
considered that my patch might not pass muster because I didn't include
new tests for the wording change.
-'f
