[spambayes-dev] Re: [Spambayes-checkins] spambayes/spambayesstorage.py, 1.31, 1.32

[Meyer, Tony]

[Anthony]
> Maybe as part of the goals for 1.1, we should work at a 
> complete/thorough test suite?
[Skip]
> I would prefer we approach it incrementally.  Every time
> you check in a change you should add tests to cover the 
> changed code.  Adding another test or two would be a nice bonus.

+1.

[Richie]
> I'm not asking that people test every part of the code 
> after making an edit.  I'm asking that people *run* the
> specific code they've edited

I'm sure that I'm easily the worse culprit at this; I've been trying to
improve my behaviour and will try harder; my apologies.  This particular
case was probably a bad example (you should have picked one of my
earlier screw ups ;) because Skip's edit shouldn't have broken anything,
and would have involved running various different setups to test it all.
The problem (traceable to me...) was not following nice style guidelines
and putting the import at the top [1].

So anyway: bad me, I will improve, but +1 to making things easier to
test.

=Tony Meyer

[1] Until Tim explained in a few messages back, I didn't realise that
this would be a problem; the same sort of thing would happily work in
C...