[racket-dev] RFC: Coding Guidelines

I, with Paul's help, worked the entire Web server through MrSpidey and eliminated all but those checks that Herman-Meunier later showed how to eliminate with their ICFP paper. That's far more than testing in some sense even if it doesn't show that it serves. 

Paul set up automatic stress tests back then already. We reported them in our paper. 

I call this judgment inaccurate. 





On Aug 19, 2010, at 9:56 AM, Shriram Krishnamurthi wrote:

> Neither would the PLT Web server.  I'm pretty certain Jay's own edits
> to it were not preceded by tests.
> 
> Jay's changes to the PLAI language most certainly were not, because
> the current PLAI that is bundled with DrRacket is broken.
> 
> (Sorry, Jay, but it's your prose.)
> 
> Shriram
> 
> On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 9:50 AM, Casey Klein
> <clklein at eecs.northwestern.edu> wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 8:44 AM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt <samth at ccs.neu.edu> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 3:57 PM, Jay McCarthy <jay.mccarthy at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Please comment.
>>> 
>>> I think that this:
>>> 
>>> "Your first task when changing old code is to build an adequate test
>>> suite to ensure you do not introduce new mistakes as you attempt to
>>> improve it. Thank you for improving the world for future generations!"
>>> 
>>> is too demanding.  There are enormous areas of our code that don't
>>> have a test suite.  How comprehensive a test suite do I need before
>>> changing slideshow?  Or scribble (which has a test suite for the
>>> syntax, but not the language)?
>> 
>> Robby and Matthew, would Slideshow exist today if you'd be expected to
>> build it with this process?
>> _________________________________________________
>>  For list-related administrative tasks:
>>  http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev
>> 
> _________________________________________________
>  For list-related administrative tasks:
>  http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev