On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 1:07 PM, Conrad Taylor <conra...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 11:10 AM, Matt Jones <al2o...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> I'd argue that since this is essentially just a Ruby 1.9 compatibility >> thing, that it shouldn't really need testing. Especially if you adopt >> the approach used earlier in the same file. >> > > If and only if, the test already exists. > > -Conrad > I jump the gun on the send button. Anyway, I feel that all enhancements and bug fixes should have an associated test that validates the fix or enhancement with even in the case where it happens to be Ruby 1.9 compatibility. Why? If you fix something and/or add a feature without a test, one wouldn't be able to verify that it works from release to release. Furthermore, I would rather catch a development error in development rather than production. Just my 2 cents, -Conrad --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
