From: Rob Browning <rlb@defaultvalue.org>
Subject: Re: 1.8 make check failing in popen.test
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2006 18:59:22 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8764hf7szp.fsf@raven.defaultvalue.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <871wsbcvm5.fsf@laas.fr> (Ludovic Courtès's message of "Mon, 24 Jul 2006 09:25:38 +0200")
ludovic.courtes@laas.fr (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> Beside the test counts (which I find useful), running all the
> scripts in a single process increases the chance of catching nasty
> bugs, as you noticed. ;-) So I think it makes sense to keep it as
> is.
Hmm. While I can see the point that running all of the test in a
single process does exercise Guile as a whole more heavily, I suppose
I was looking at this more from the perspective of testing accuracy.
Running all of the tests in a single process increases the chance that
some unrelated action by a previous test might inadvertently break (or
just improperly skew) the current test, i.e. it makes it harder to
isolate your variables. Such a problem seems like the kind of thing
that might take a long time to track down, without providing any
useful diagnostics.
--
Rob Browning
rlb @defaultvalue.org and @debian.org; previously @cs.utexas.edu
GPG starting 2002-11-03 = 14DD 432F AE39 534D B592 F9A0 25C8 D377 8C7E 73A4
_______________________________________________
Guile-devel mailing list
Guile-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-07-30 1:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-07-23 8:37 1.8 make check failing in popen.test Rob Browning
2006-07-23 22:36 ` Kevin Ryde
2006-07-23 23:12 ` Rob Browning
2006-07-24 7:25 ` Ludovic Courtès
2006-07-30 1:59 ` Rob Browning [this message]
2006-08-15 8:35 ` Rob Browning
2006-08-15 23:13 ` Kevin Ryde
2006-08-16 1:18 ` Rob Browning
2006-08-16 23:26 ` Kevin Ryde
2006-08-18 3:01 ` Rob Browning
2006-08-21 23:38 ` Kevin Ryde
2006-08-22 2:03 ` Rob Browning
2006-08-25 1:16 ` Kevin Ryde
2006-08-25 2:39 ` Rob Browning
2006-08-27 20:06 ` Rob Browning
2006-08-27 20:22 ` Rob Browning
2006-08-30 7:50 ` Rob Browning
2006-08-31 0:24 ` Kevin Ryde
2006-08-31 6:28 ` Rob Browning
2006-09-04 2:45 ` Rob Browning
2006-09-07 20:46 ` Kevin Ryde
2006-09-08 2:45 ` Rob Browning
2006-09-08 23:05 ` Kevin Ryde
2006-09-09 12:52 ` Marius Vollmer
2006-09-09 16:39 ` Rob Browning
2006-09-10 16:24 ` Rob Browning
2006-09-11 1:16 ` Rob Browning
2006-09-11 6:40 ` Neil Jerram
2006-09-11 15:57 ` Rob Browning
2006-09-11 17:40 ` Neil Jerram
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=8764hf7szp.fsf@raven.defaultvalue.org \
--to=rlb@defaultvalue.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).