Message329635
>> ISTM that the coverage tests as currently written aren't good tests.
> Hi, I'd like to remind everyone to be open, respectful, and considerate. There are ways to describe hos things that can be improved. There is no need to denigrate other people's work.
I find this to be an overreaction in this case. Sure, it could have been worded more positively, but the negativity was very mild; the tests weren't even being called "bad", not to mention overly negative wording e.g. "horrible".
Further, you omitted the followup explanation of *what about the tests isn't good*:
> Otherwise, the tests are relying on a non-guaranteed implementation detail.
IMO we shouldn't require ourselves to be overly careful in our wording, such as avoiding any negative wording entirely. |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2018-11-10 18:37:10 | taleinat | set | recipients:
+ taleinat, rhettinger, scoder, vstinner, nedbat, eli.bendersky, serhiy.storchaka, Mariatta, dfrojas |
2018-11-10 18:37:10 | taleinat | set | messageid: <1541875030.66.0.788709270274.issue34160@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2018-11-10 18:37:10 | taleinat | link | issue34160 messages |
2018-11-10 18:37:10 | taleinat | create | |
|