> by definition wrong... What I meant, even if I didn't say so explicitly,
> was ways to keep the testing from reaching the point of diminishing
> returns.
Yep, that's the point. Trick is in knowing how to do that without either
oversimplifying and drawing poor conclusions or spending so much time
testing that you don't do anything else.
> I do like testing (to quote myself: a test never fails, it ALWAYS gives
> you information), but within reason... let it be meaningful and
> productive, not ad infinitum...
That is exactly correct.
> harder on the brush & there go the 512... (There *is* no absolute control,
> anywhere.)
Also true, but that is another discussion in and of itself. I think I've
bored the list long enough as it is.
- Wayde
(wallen@boulder.nist.gov)