lbalbalba at gmail.com
Mon Apr 21 23:37:25 PDT 2014
In theory, I agree with you that it would be nicer if the entire thing
would have been written in a single language. In practice, however :
The fuzzer was already written, and in perl: Morten Welinder (of
gnumeric fame) wrote a perl XML fuzzer - which you can find here:
http://git.gnome.org/browse/gnumeric/tree/test/fuzzxml. So I took
that. (the bug report references that code).
The code to make libreoffice open and close documents was already
there, in 'dev-tools/test-bugzilla-filestest-bugzilla-files.py'. So I
took that, and only took out the parts I didnt need (file validation,
Now I know neither python nor perl; but i can do some unix shell scripting.
So the fact that made it an 'EasyHack' for me was, that the hard parts
were already written and I 'only' had to glue the stuff together using
Unix shell scripting. Sadly, re-coding it in either perl or python in
its entirety is beyond my current skill set; so if that would turn out
to be a requirement then im afraid i have to abandon the easyhack bug
and let others step in.
We may want to continue this discuss this point on list or in the
gerrit review though; its a valid point.
On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 10:58 PM, Keith Curtis <keithcu at gmail.com> wrote:
> It looks interesting. The only thing I noticed is that it is written
> in both Perl and Python. I'm no Python expert yet, but I've done some,
> and never written Perl.
> I think it would be nice if small tools like this were all in one
> language, to lessen the requirements for someone to be able to
> contribute. The number of people who know Python is 100x greater than
> the number of people who know both Perl and Python.
> What do you think?
More information about the LibreOffice