From: Bob Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 16:30:22 -0400
From: "jerry gay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 08:35:01 -0700
. . .
Parrot::Distribution offers a number of subroutines which allow one to
specify which subset of parrot f
On Saturday 28 July 2007 15:00:18 James E Keenan wrote:
> So, in principle, we can and should reduce the number of tests in 'make
> test' and hence reduce its running time. But that requires *all* of us
> -- not just ptc and me -- to be more diligent about running the
> specialized testing target
From: James E Keenan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 18:00:18 -0400
. . .
So, in principle, we can and should reduce the number of tests in 'make
test' and hence reduce its running time. But that requires *all* of us
-- not just ptc and me -- to be more diligent ab
Paul Cochrane wrote:
As a short term improvement of the situtation, how would a "make
test-cage" target sound? This would be the same as "make test" but
with the coding standards (and any other cage-cleanliness-checking
tests) shifted into this suite, and not run by default with "make
test".
From: "jerry gay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 08:35:01 -0700
On 7/28/07, Bob Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[sorry; forgot to attach the attachment.]
> As a step in that direction, is there an easy way to find out which
> coding standards tests should be applied
From: "jerry gay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 08:35:01 -0700
On 7/28/07, Bob Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As a step in that direction, is there an easy way to find out which
> coding standards tests should be applied to a given source file? Some
> have "c_
On 7/28/07, Bob Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>From: "Paul Cochrane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 13:39:09 +0200
>
>. . .
>
>A longer term strategy would be to check for recently changed files
>(since the developer's last "svn up") and to run the coding standa
From: "Paul Cochrane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 13:39:09 +0200
. . .
A longer term strategy would be to check for recently changed files
(since the developer's last "svn up") and to run the coding standards
tests only over those files . . .
Paul
As a step i
On 28/07/07, chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Let me preface this by saying that I know that our static analysis tests
> represent a tremendous amount of work by several people (especially Paul,
> with an enormous amount of respect to everyone who's contributed also to
> Perl::Critic and PPI)
Let me preface this by saying that I know that our static analysis tests
represent a tremendous amount of work by several people (especially Paul,
with an enormous amount of respect to everyone who's contributed also to
Perl::Critic and PPI), and that they have helped us reach and do help us
ma
10 matches
Mail list logo
