From: cpickett <cpickett@64e312b2-a51f-0410-8e61-82d0ca0eb02a>
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 21:15:49 +0000 (+0000)
Subject: * fix dead link on web index.html, closing bug 3592019
X-Git-Tag: 0.10.0~480
X-Git-Url: https://granicus.if.org/sourcecode?a=commitdiff_plain;h=5fac51f1c266a599926bbdf8097b571673c19ef8;p=check

* fix dead link on web index.html, closing bug 3592019
* clean up spacing around a couple of other links


git-svn-id: svn+ssh://svn.code.sf.net/p/check/code/trunk@700 64e312b2-a51f-0410-8e61-82d0ca0eb02a
---

diff --git a/index.html b/index.html
index 6e7b5c1..c2afb49 100644
--- a/index.html
+++ b/index.html
@@ -14,15 +14,16 @@ code editors and IDEs..</p>
 <p>Check was inspired by similar frameworks that currently exist for
 most programming languages; the most famous example being JUnit for
 Java (<a href="http://www.junit.org">www.junit.org</a>). There is a
-list of unit testing frameworks for multiple languages at <a
- href="http://www.xprogramming.com/software.htm">www.xprogramming.com/software.htm</a>
-. Unit testing has a long history as part of formal quality assurance
+list of unit testing frameworks for multiple languages
+at <a href="http://www.xprogramming.com/software/">www.xprogramming.com/software/</a>.
+Unit testing has a long history as part of formal quality assurance
 methodologies, but has recently been associated with the lightweight
 methodology called Extreme Programming. In that methodology, the
 characteristic practice involves interspersing unit test writing with
-coding (" test a little, code a little"). While the incremental unit
+coding ("test a little, code a little"). While the incremental unit
 test/code approach is indispensable to Extreme Programming, it is also
-applicable, and perhaps indispensable, outside of that methodology. </p>
+applicable, and perhaps indispensable, outside of that
+methodology. </p>
 <p>The incremental test/code approach provides three main benefits to
 the developer:</p>
 <p> </p>
@@ -33,8 +34,9 @@ should be designed for usage early in the coding process.</li>
   <li>They help the developer think early about aberrant cases, and
 code accordingly.</li>
   <li>By providing a documented level of correctness, they allow the
-developer to refactor (see <a href="http://www.refactoring.com">www.refactoring.com</a>
-) aggressively.</li>
+developer to refactor
+(see <a href="http://www.refactoring.com">www.refactoring.com</a>)
+aggressively.</li>
 </ol>
 <p>That third reason is the one that turns people into unit testing
 addicts. There is nothing so satisfying as doing a wholesale
@@ -70,8 +72,9 @@ Project <a href="./NEWS">NEWS</a>, a summarized changelog.<br>
 enhancement requests, bug reports, patches, or documentation.&nbsp;
 Mailing lists are preferred to forums as they're easier to
 monitor.&nbsp; Please visit the Check project page at <a
- href="http://sourceforge.net/projects/check/">http://sourceforge.net/projects/check/<br>
-</a></p>
+ href="http://sourceforge.net/projects/check/">http://sourceforge.net/projects/check/</a>.
+<br>
+</p>
 <p>Patches to Check, unless trivial, should be against the latest SVN
 trunk, and should include a full set of unit tests testing the new
 behavior. No functionality goes into Check without unit tests, and