1. It was your claim that it was "just formatting changes". Which they are not
2. This doesn't explain why 99% of bug fixes contain no tests
> If it's provably false, then take your time to actually prove it before calling someone a liar.
Testing and comments in code are not high standards. They are basic development hygiene.
> Absolute nonsense. Read the changelogs, roadmap and Github releases before making such claims.
I've read them, that's why I'm making such claims.
Releases: https://github.com/red/red/releases
Barely above one patch increment a year for the past three years:
- Nov 2018, 0.6.4
- Jul 2018, 0.6.3
- Mar 2017, 0.6.2
- Jun 2016, 0.6.1
- Mar 2016, 0.6.0
Minor versions incremented from 0.1. to 0.6 in 7 years, and increments have slowed down.
So, we are expected to believe that 7 years from now when it maybe reaches 1.0.0 the devs will suddenly go through all the code, add comments and tests, and start caring?
> no one will adhere to your idealistic, unencumbered by reality version of how things should be done.
Me: when you fix issues, you should really add tests to those fixes. At least strive to have more than ~0 tests in your fixes. Add documentation to critical parts of your system.
You: "your idealistic, unencumbered by reality version"
:-\
That's why I'm extremely sceptical. What is considered the norm pretty much everywhere is viewed as "unencumbered by reality" in Red world.
> Feedback filtered out of your messages is appreciated, and taken into account.
I very much doubt it was taken into account.