Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 2. Won't dissolving away "static" cause naming conflicts?
Most likely (and I for one will for sure resist any attempt to force
global uniqueness on static names). It seems that that whole issue
is easily avoided though ... just #include the source file under test
into the unit-test module for it, instead of compiling them separately.
> 3. Unit testing frameworks are best suited to component-based
> architectures, ISTM. I'm not sure that one would fit Postgres very well.
I have strong doubts about the usefulness of this too, but if Gavin and
Neil want to invest some time in trying it, I won't stand in their way.
One thing I don't particularly want is a bunch of invasive code changes,
at least in advance of seeing convincing proof that this will be a big win
for us. The bits about "we'll just refactor the code till we like it"
are raising some red flags for me --- I think that that is at least as
likely to introduce new bugs as find existing ones.
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html
