From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,b30bd69fa8f63cb2
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-06-13 09:05:54 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!wn13feed!worldnet.att.net!216.166.71.14!border3.nntp.aus1.giganews.com!intern1.nntp.aus1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!nntp.gbronline.com!news.gbronline.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 11:05:48 -0500
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 11:06:27 -0500
From: Wesley Groleau <wesgroleau@despammed.com>
Reply-To: wesgroleau@despammed.com
Organization: Ain't no organization here!
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US;
 rv:1.3.1) Gecko/20030425
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, es-mx, pt-br, fr-ca
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: C bug of the day
References: <1054751321.434656@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
 <memo.20030605193115.9141A@brangdon.madasafish.com>
 <d6652001.0306100323.338a2a1c@posting.google.com>
 <bc4n70$fei5u$1@ID-175126.news.dfncis.de>
 <slrnbeboi5.1qc.randhol+abuse@kiuk0152.chembio.ntnu.no>
 <82347202.0306101232.16776a81@posting.google.com>
 <d6652001.0306110131.6ac9e693@posting.google.com>
 <Xns9397449823400jimmaureenrogers@204.127.36.1>
 <d6652001.0306120439.75bdfe78@posting.google.com>
 <NWgGa.25387$JA5.474581@news.xtra.co.nz>
 <d6652001.0306130643.1e320398@posting.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <d6652001.0306130643.1e320398@posting.google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <BzGdnXZ726PAa3SjXTWcoQ@gbronline.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 216.117.18.42
X-Trace: 
 sv3-x8hKqy14j0KaAj6vQkZNouTXp5hjL72x9nUKN2/XfdnxjDqjPp9OA6SoGSuXfoH88RiXlrYw1grhSqn!eSCvbfNRfydufUpVhmU7WIg2zADQ70IZYJIDFc4+ljaKAxP4A1OCDIFHxTs1HzEMSulvdkxZdHLG!6y0d
X-Complaints-To: abuse@gbronline.com
X-DMCA-Complaints-To: abuse@gbronline.com
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint
 properly
X-Postfilter: 1.1
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:39131
Date: 2003-06-13T11:06:27-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


> I don't think so.  Unit tests are essential, regardless of the
> language.  Some errors simply cannot be caught until run-time.
> 
> Of course, if a shop is well run, the unit tests will run clean first
> time.  But they remain necessary to keep the programmers honest.

I was once required to use a tool that parsed the
source code and generated unit tests for you.

The only problem (which I could not persuade management
of) was that it did not truly test our code.  The tests
NEVER failed unless there was a compiler bug, because
all the tool did was determine what the code ought to do
and test for that.