Sorry... I didn't notice the [] after the add: ... (so tired tonight :( ) in that case this test is Ok.. but the inlined version is failing.... 2009/6/17 Nicolas Cellier <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice@gmail.com>
Ah, yes, I don't understand neither. For me, the non inlined version seems to work already and gives #(5 5 5 5 5). The inlined version fails and gives #(1 2 3 4 5), except if you fool the Compiler with the trick I have indicated:
testWhileModificationBefore | index | index := 0. [ index < 5 ] whileTrue: [ index := index + 1. collection add: [1>2 ifTrue: [index:=0]. index ] ]. self assertValues: #(5 5 5 5 5)
The point remains:some well known failing tests that won't be solved should go in known failures.
+1 for the inlined version of the test... (unless we want to fix it in the short term)....
Nicolas
2009/6/17 Lukas Renggli <renggli@gmail.com>
I suggest this test be moved in known failures.
Lukas ?
I don't get it ;-)
This looks fine to me.
Lukas
-- Lukas Renggli http://www.lukas-renggli.ch
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project