On Sat, Feb 24, 2018 at 6:09 AM, Python <pyt...@bladeshadow.org> wrote: > On Sat, Feb 24, 2018 at 05:56:25AM +1100, Chris Angelico wrote: >> No, not satisfied. Everything you've said would still be satisfied if >> all versions of the benchmark used the same non-recursive algorithm. >> There's nothing here that says it's testing recursion, just that (for >> consistency) it's testing the same algorithm. There is no reason to >> specifically test *recursion*, unless that actually aligns with what >> you're doing. > > It seems abundantly clear to me that testing recursion is the point of > writing a benchmark implementing recursion (and very little of > anything else). Again, you can decide for yourself the suitability of > the benchmark, but I don't think you can really claim it doesn't > effectively test what it means to.
Where do you get that it's specifically a recursion benchmark though? I can't find it anywhere in the explanatory text. ChrisA -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
