On Monday, July 25, 2016 at 8:59:10 AM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 1:20 PM, Rustom Mody wrote: > >> so ultimately, it all comes down to testing anyway. > > > > All?? > > > > There is a famous quote by Dijkstra: > > «Testing shows the presence, not the absence of bugs» > > > > Or if you prefer things of a more ‘practical’ (so-called_ nature: > > http://www.testingexcellence.com/reasons-automated-tests-fail-to-find-regression-bugs/ > > If testing won't find the bugs, what will? By "testing", I don't just > mean automated tests, although of course that's one of the most > efficient ways. Dogfooding is an important part of testing too.
Dijkstra made that (and such) statements towards advocating formal program proving. Whether we agree/disagree with that line is one thing. The bald fact that tests are finite and the actual search space for cases for anything remotely non-trivial is infinite is undeniable. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
