On 11/26/2017 08:39 AM, bartc wrote:
> The problem was traced to two lines that were in the wrong order (in the
> original program). I can't see how unit tests can have helped in any way
> at all, and it would probably have taken much longer.
What makes you think that? Surely other decoders were
On 11/26/2017 07:11 AM, bartc wrote:
>> You may argue that testing doesn't matter for his small game, written
>> for his own education and amusement. The fact is that software in
>> general is of abysmal quality across the boards, and promoting a habit
>> of unit testing is good, even for trivial,
On 11/25/2017 12:58 PM, namenobodywa...@gmail.com wrote:
> the idea is that there should be exactly one object posinf (positive
infinity) that compares as strictly greater than any number ever considered,
and exactly one object neginf that compares as strictly less; as the code
stands now there is
On 11/25/2017 06:00 AM, bartc wrote:
> And there's a quite lot left of the rest of the program to worry about too!
>
> If you add 'window()' at the end of the program, then it seems to run on
> Python 3. I'd play around with it first before thinking up strategies
> for testing it.
Actually, no. U
On 11/25/2017 06:00 AM, bartc wrote:
> And there's a quite lot left of the rest of the program to worry about too!
>
> If you add 'window()' at the end of the program, then it seems to run on
> Python 3. I'd play around with it first before thinking up strategies
> for testing it.
Actually, no. U
