RE: gEDA: Verilog: misc. elaboration

[stevenwilson <stevenwilson-at-NOSPAMmicron_dot_com>]

Well - the BIG differences is lack of GPL when published
to the list, and lack of self-checking where possible. 

Where required - I would write a test to cover the same
issue(even if it isn't in the test plan) If the tests 
are GPL'd as published - so much the better.  

Further, I'd probably modify the test plan to cover such 
tests - mainly because the test planis serving as docuementation.  I
'm trying to keep the two in sync. It isn't THAT much 
trouble since I'm using the plan interactively as a script 
as to what I'm working on ANYWAY...

Adequate?

Steve Wilson
-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen Williams [mailto:steve@icarus.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 1999 10:55 AM
To: geda-dev@geda.seul.org
Subject: Re: gEDA: Verilog: misc. elaboration 



stevenwilson@micron.com said:
> I'll ensure that these get covered in the test suite!

Some of these tests, including those from Peter and Guy, should be
included literally in a test suite. It doesn't really matter if they
cover a feature you already cover, they are different programs and
vicissitudes of ivl compilation and optimization can make a seemingly
trivial difference cause significantly different results.

*Especially if they somehow fail when they are presented to us.*

Perhaps a Regression section is needed?
-- 
Steve Williams                "The woods are lovely, dark and deep.
steve@icarus.com              But I have promises to keep,
steve@picturel.com            and lines to code before I sleep,
http://www.picturel.com       And lines to code before I sleep."