Re: All's quiet ... RC3 packaging ...

On Wed, Apr 04, 2001 at 10:56:27AM -0400, Tom Lane allegedly wrote:
> The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> writes:
> > On Wed, 4 Apr 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> I think we've got to remove that failing horology test before we wrap RC3.
>
> > can we comment out the test for now, so that its still in there, but not
> > tested? or is there absolutely non way that we can fix that in the long
> > term?
>
> Commenting it out was the only idea that I had. Maybe Thomas has a
> better idea, though.

Why not work with a maximum error in the regression tests? For instance,
allow a small difference after the 8th digit? That would pick out the
real bugs and let the round-off errors pass, right?

Mathijs
--
It's not that perl programmers are idiots, it's that the language
rewards idiotic behavior in a way that no other language or tool has
ever done.
Erik Naggum