Stefan Krah <stefan-use...@bytereef.org> added the comment: Mark Dickinson <rep...@bugs.python.org> wrote: > The only problem from my perspective is getting someone to find time to > review such a massive patch. I've been wondering whether we could get away > with some kind of 'statistical' review: do a large-scale review, and then > instead of having someone go through every line of C code, pick a few > representative sections at random and review those. If those code portions > make it through the review unscathed, declare the code good and merge it in.
The regex module is in a somewhat similar situation. If I'm interpreting this http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-August/113240.html dialogue correctly, a complete audit down to the last line isn't always necessary. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue7652> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
