4 ms·

Obviously not, if nobody was willing to buy the test suite for their internal forks.

• The_Colonel 4y ago
  That's a non-sequitur argument.
  • morelisp 4y ago
    It follows fine, but you want to debate instead of think. If the 100% MC/DC coverage was critical to forks, the companies that fork (there's lots of them!) would have bought it. Nobody bought it, so it's not that important to maintaining a fork compared to the regular test suite even for such environments. A test suite which, to go back to my first comment, is still leagues ahead of the dozen other pieces of lynchpin software most companies have no problem depending on. Meanwhile, for the 99.9% of us out here not building aircraft and merely shipping a billion browsers or phones...
    • The_Colonel 4y ago
      > If the 100% MC/DC coverage was critical to forks, the companies that fork (there's lots of them!) would have bought it. Again, that's a non-sequitur (or perhaps strawman, you can choose), because I wasn't addressing the proprietary test set, merely the comparison between a text editor and a database, which is completely absurd since the tolerance for failures is drastically different.
      • morelisp 4y ago
        > I wasn't addressing the proprietary test set Then perhaps you're in the wrong thread to be saying anything at all.