Matthew Toseland wrote:
> This is a stronger proposal IMHO.
>
Thank you :)
> We have loads of easy-to-test stuff in support/ and to a lesser degree
> crypt/ where a breakage could break the whole node.
>
Very good :)
> Higher level unit tests would also be pretty interesting. Once you've
> added the infrastructure for some high-level tests, we could add new
> ones relatively easily, and it also lets us do real-code simulations
> with multiple nodes in a single VM and irrelevant layers disabled.
>
Of course it would be the most difficult part. IMHO it will also be
useful as "code documentation" about creating nodes and disabling layers.
I think tests are always a good documentation ;)
> On Tue, Mar 20, 2007 at 03:44:43PM +0100, Sback wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> this is the second proposal. As before comments will be appreciated!
>>
[cut]
