On 6/3/06, L505 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You simply can't always write tests *before* you develop your program because
this is
too much design up front. If you know all the tests you should write before you
even *have
A am afraid you are very misguided about what Test Driven Development
act
> On 6/3/06, Jilani Khaldi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Learn to code with UnitTests (process is called Test Driven
> > > Development).
> >
> > Never used. How does this work? I found only a unit called
> > "UnitTests.pp" and nothing else.
>
> Use an xUnit testing framework while coding. Free
> Regarding TDD (Test Driven Development) look at the following websites:
> In short - You write a test, Write the code, Run the tests, Refactor.
> Then repeat the whole process... The first 3 steps should be
> completed in under a minute. As I said, it is very different to
> traditional program
On 6/3/06, Jilani Khaldi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Learn to code with UnitTests (process is called Test Driven
> Development).
Never used. How does this work? I found only a unit called
"UnitTests.pp" and nothing else.
Use an xUnit testing framework while coding. Free Pascal comes with
fpc
Jilani Khaldi wrote:
>
>> Learn to code with UnitTests (process is called Test Driven
>> Development).
>
> Never used. How does this work? I found only a unit called
> "UnitTests.pp" and nothing else.
> Thank you.
The first article that started the practice, written by Kent Beck and
Erich Gamm
Learn to code with UnitTests (process is called Test Driven
Development).
Never used. How does this work? I found only a unit called
"UnitTests.pp" and nothing else.
Thank you.
jk
___
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http:/
On 6/3/06, A.J. Venter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The debian version on the other hand is well over 200 lines of code by itself,
and I am not entirely sure my version is going to be stable on all testdata
yet.
Learn to code with UnitTests (process is called Test Driven
Development). I have to
>
> Your code can't work with these ones, 4.1.15 and 4.12.1 because you
> only pad the 3rd (15 and 1), you need to pad each part of the
> version, my pseudocode out 4.1[space].15 and 4.12.1[space]. You can
> call your function with the 4,4; again with 12,1 utnil you get a
> result but you nee
On 6/2/06, Vincent Snijders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Split the version string in several numbers:
version := '4.0.12';
major := 4
minor := 0;
patch := 12;
I think this is the winner solution.
But you don´t have to do this:
versionnumber := major * 1 + minor * 100 + patch
It´s better
> Your code can't work with these ones, 4.1.15 and 4.12.1 because you
> only pad the 3rd (15 and 1), you need to pad each part of the
> version, my pseudocode out 4.1[space].15 and 4.12.1[space]. You can
> call your function with the 4,4; again with 12,1 utnil you get a
> result but you need a
At 01:41 03/06/2006, you wrote:
> Simple, just a variation of your first try. Use ASCII comparation,
> but all parts must have the same digits, in your case, you padd the
> 3rd part (or any part) with any letter down the ascii code of 0, for
> example ' ' (a space)
This was a brilliant idea as f
> Simple, just a variation of your first try. Use ASCII comparation,
> but all parts must have the same digits, in your case, you padd the
> 3rd part (or any part) with any letter down the ascii code of 0, for
> example ' ' (a space)
This was a brilliant idea as far as I can see. MUCH simpler than
At 23:03 02/06/2006, you wrote:
I have tried about a dozen different algorithms now, and I admit to being
stumped because everyone I've tried fails SOMEWHERE.
The task before me is to compare version numbers of software packages and
determine which is higher.
First try was to simply do a string
Actually I found my answer just now after asking a friend who is a debian
user.
Turns out debian documents the pseudocode for their method in the manpages.
So I am just busy translating the pseudo to pascal now.
1. take any initial string of non-digits from each, remove, and compare
ASCIIbetica
A.J. Venter wrote:
So the question is:
1) does somebody HAVE an algorithm for this already ?
2) If not, can somebody give me a hint about what approach to take ?
Split the version string in several numbers:
version := '4.0.12';
major := 4
minor := 0;
patch := 12;
versionnumber := major * 1
> I have tried about a dozen different algorithms now, and I admit to being
> stumped because everyone I've tried fails SOMEWHERE.
>
> The task before me is to compare version numbers of software packages and
> determine which is higher.
> First try was to simply do a string comparison.
> This
16 matches
Mail list logo
