We need more of these „How project X is tested” articles. Keep them coming!<p>Here’s one on SQLite: <a href="https://www.sqlite.org/testing.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.sqlite.org/testing.html</a>
I read this page and i'm reminded of this tweet: <a href="https://twitter.com/6thgrade4ever/status/1433519577892327424" rel="nofollow">https://twitter.com/6thgrade4ever/status/1433519577892327424</a><p>It's not true that just because a product is open source, it will be of good quality. I don't have enough knowledge to say the following is true or that i'm not just suffering confirmation bias but it does appear to be true that at the extremes, the best quality software delivery processes are from open source projects.<p>I would shoot holes in my own argument by pointing out specific projects from NASA.
I'm looking forward to the improvements to the ergonomics of testing as programming languages mature. For example I really like how Rust has allowed the integration of runnable code into the docstrings of functions to combat documentation being out of date with the current iteration of the function.<p>Ultimately though, I believe any amount of testing that can be pushed into the compiler/virtualmachine of the language is the most effective. I've learned that people (myself included) don't always code as robustly as they could (either through inexperience, negligence, time/market constraints etc). I can't count how many times I've told myself, I'll go back and write a test for this later.
Other discussion where this appeared regarding the rust rewrite<p><a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29456115" rel="nofollow">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29456115</a>
Maybe my brain cells are slow today but even after reading a bunch of times I can't understand what's the point of the returns_ helper function. Could someone kindly give an explanation for dummies?