From: "Hal E. Fulton" <hal9000@...>
Date: 2002-09-18T13:41:27+09:00
Subject: Re: Code coverage in Ruby?

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jim Freeze" <jim@freeze.org>
To: "ruby-talk ML" <ruby-talk@ruby-lang.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 11:27 PM
Subject: Re: Code coverage in Ruby?


> On Wed, Sep 18, 2002 at 12:12:51PM +0900, Hal E. Fulton wrote:
> > 
> > My second most common runtime error is that a 
> > constant or variable is not defined.
> > 
> Won't -w catch these?

<confession>
You know, I never use -w. :) I should form
that habit.
</confession>

On that issue, I sometimes see warnings that I
wish I could get rid of. For example: 'if x = y'
or better yet 'while x=meth' will give me a 
warning. Sometimes I'm grateful, but sometimes
I *wanted* to do that. Maybe that's my C showing.

Almost makes me wish for something like Ada's
pragma or Pascal's {$...} to tell the interpreter
"Ignore the suspicious-looking code on this line.
Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain."

But that would probably make Ruby more complex
and ugly. That's "(more complex) and (ugly)", not
"more (complex and ugly)".  :)

Boy, I'm getting tired.

Hal