Re: [ANN] Lua 5.3.2 (rc2) now available

[Nagaev Boris <bnagaev@...>]

On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 3:56 PM, Roberto Ierusalimschy
<roberto@inf.puc-rio.br> wrote:
> The "basic tests" (with _U=1) are far from minimal. They already cover a
> lot of ground (I would guess its converage is >90%),

Is test coverage measured with some tool? Is it lines-of-code coverage
or branch coverage? I would like to read 10% (or 1%) of non-covered
code (and maybe cover it or find bugs in it). Lua's code is too small
not to be covered 100.0%.

> We prefer to avoid everybody running the tests, because in the end it
> generates more noise than signal. (That is why they are not bundled in
> the Lua tarball.)

I do not understand this point. More testers => more errors found. If
tests are too complicated, maybe it is time to reorganize them using
Busted [1].

[1] http://olivinelabs.com/busted/

-- 


Best regards,
Boris Nagaev