Re: yet another unit test framework? -- was fdo#55814: unit test is missing

Bjoern Michaelsen <bjoern.michaelsen -AT- canonical.com>
Thu, 4 Apr 2013 12:18:20 +0200

On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 10:57:59AM +0200, Markus Mohrhard wrote:

2013/4/4 David Ostrovsky <d.ostrovsky@gmx.de>

I am not going to provide the huge advantages of dynamic type languages
in general here, but while python is very impressive it *is* truly
read-write language compare to number of write-only languages, that used
in LO ecosystem.


Do we really want to start a discussion on this level?


/me hands Markus a certificate confirming him as the 'trollfeeder of the month'
-- with Tor a close second in the category. ;)

Best,

Bjoern

Context

Re: yet another unit test framework? -- was fdo#55814: unit test is missing (continued)

Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.