On 10/22/07, James Keenan via RT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon Oct 22 18:16:51 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > i.e., Why we do we need this here when "\n" suffices everywhere else > > in > > > the Parrot distribution? > > > > I can't think of a reason. While you're at it, how about getting rid > > of the > > use of 'and' for flow control here by turning them into print ... if > > ...? > > > > The code coverage fanatic in me tends to agree, since 'and' -> condition > coverage while 'if' -> branch coverage, and it's generally easier to get > 100% branch coverage than that ratio in condition coverage. > > I think I'll give the masses (and perhaps those who wrote this code in > the first place) 24 hours to speak up. I'll make any fixes in the > course of writing other unit tests for this package and 3 similar ones I > just noticed. > it's my coding style, and my code. you're likely to see that in any code i've written in the past five or so years, possibly longer. do with it what you will; i have no desire to enter into a discussion about coding style.
~jerry
