On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 12:15 PM, Niko Schwarz <niko.schwarz@googlemail.com> wrote:

Hi,

Currently, to mark a test as an expected failure, `expectedFailures`
should be overwritten
(http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3976596/how-to-mark-expected-failures-in-sunit).
That's a bit tricky to figure out, so I added a comment to the method:
SUnit-NikoSchwarz.114. However, I think it's still a usability bug:
marking something as an expectedFailure isn't visible inside the test.

I think expectedFailures should look through the pragmas of its tests
and return an array of all method names that contain the pragma
<expectedFailure>.

Yes, that's better. But in addition, sometimes we need conditions. For example:

Smalltalk listPlugins contains: 'blahhh' ifFalse[ expectedFailures add: 'testBlah' ]

or whatever condition. Can you do that with pragmas?

the other problem is that we don't have expectedErrors as well. This is bad and confusing.

cheers

mariano

�

�

Cheers,

Niko

--
http://scg.unibe.ch/staff/Schwarz
twitter.com/nes1983
Tel: +41 076 235 8683

_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project