[off-list]
Reviving an oldish thread...
Reference:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/automake-patches/2010-11/msg2.html
On Monday 01 November 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
* Valentin David wrote on Mon, Nov 01, 2010 at 09:41:47PM CET:
I hope I will be able to prepare the new patches
Hello Pippijn.
On Saturday 13 November 2010, Pippijn van wrote:
On Mon, Nov 01, 2010 at 08:18:44PM +0100, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
Ideally, I would like to see testsuite coverage for each code path
(branch coverage) for new code. I understand that only Stefano is
able to produce this in
* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 01:36:16PM CET:
But it's not like I have a silver bullet to write proper tests
which attain complete branch coverage; I just proceed by common
sense, trying to maximize such coverage. That's all, sadly.
A while ago I posted instructions on how
On Sunday 14 November 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 01:36:16PM CET:
But it's not like I have a silver bullet to write proper tests
which attain complete branch coverage; I just proceed by common
sense, trying to maximize such coverage.
On Mon, Nov 01, 2010 at 08:18:44PM +0100, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
Ideally, I would like to see testsuite coverage for each code path
(branch coverage) for new code. I understand that only Stefano is
able to produce this in reasonable amount of time, so whatever you guys
can manage is better
Hi Valentin,
let's move to the -patches list. And sorry for the long delay.
* Valentin David wrote on Fri, Sep 03, 2010 at 06:56:53PM CEST:
I propose a patch as attached.
* The lang_*_rewrite are added to the Language structure. The default
is lang_sub_obj. They do not return anymore the
On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 8:18 PM, Ralf Wildenhues ralf.wildenh...@gmx.de wrote:
* Valentin David wrote on Fri, Sep 03, 2010 at 06:56:53PM CEST:
* --libdir= can be called several times, the arguments can also have a
list of paths separated by a colon. Empty paths correspond to the
original
* Valentin David wrote on Mon, Nov 01, 2010 at 09:41:47PM CET:
On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 8:18 PM, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
Also, I like the approach of calling the whole feature experimental and
at the same time asking users to tell us which features from automake.in
they need so we can document
refactoring
by itself. Could this be done in separate, preparatory patch preceding
the implementation of the user extensions support proper?
Sure, I can make a series of patches like that. But there might be
also a lot of refactoring afterwards as well.
Of course; I was just pointing out
, preparatory patch preceding
the implementation of the user extensions support proper?
Sure, I can make a series of patches like that. But there might be
also a lot of refactoring afterwards as well. For example language
dependent code should probably all move in a different file and be
imported via
10 matches
Mail list logo
