I applied all changes from the inbox and the test run showed expected results, 2 expected, 4 failures. Norbert
I made 3 more tests pass: - Fixed Monticello to pass MCSnapshotBrowserTest>>testButtonMutex (Monticello-al.317) - Fix FloatTest to not depend on platform for representation of NaN bit pattern (KernelTests-al.67) - Remove test testUnimplementedNonPrimitiveCalls (Tests-al.25) So now, using the other fixes of Norbert, the only test failing is #testUnwindDebuggerWithStep Cheers, Adrian PS: Stef, it seems that the package versions from the last update you made are still in PharoInbox. On Jun 20, 2008, at 23:11 , Norbert Hartl wrote:
I applied all changes from the inbox and the test run showed expected results, 2 expected, 4 failures.
Norbert
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
Ok I was not aware that alain published packages in the inbox. I will go over them. Did norbert published his packages finally? Stef On Jun 22, 2008, at 12:42 PM, Adrian Lienhard wrote:
I made 3 more tests pass:
- Fixed Monticello to pass MCSnapshotBrowserTest>>testButtonMutex (Monticello-al.317) - Fix FloatTest to not depend on platform for representation of NaN bit pattern (KernelTests-al.67) - Remove test testUnimplementedNonPrimitiveCalls (Tests-al.25)
So now, using the other fixes of Norbert, the only test failing is #testUnwindDebuggerWithStep
Cheers, Adrian
PS: Stef, it seems that the package versions from the last update you made are still in PharoInbox.
On Jun 20, 2008, at 23:11 , Norbert Hartl wrote:
I applied all changes from the inbox and the test run showed expected results, 2 expected, 4 failures.
Norbert
_______________________________________________ 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
On Sun, 2008-06-22 at 12:42 +0200, Adrian Lienhard wrote:
I made 3 more tests pass:
- Fixed Monticello to pass MCSnapshotBrowserTest>>testButtonMutex (Monticello-al.317) - Fix FloatTest to not depend on platform for representation of NaN bit pattern (KernelTests-al.67) - Remove test testUnimplementedNonPrimitiveCalls (Tests-al.25)
Hmmm I'm not sure if it is a good idea to delete this test. It is a kind of test like ReleaseTest>>testUndeclared. It isn't critical but it helps moving to a clean target. I would opt to keep the test. At least I would turn it into a "expected failure" as long as we aren't far enough to state this to be totally clean.
So now, using the other fixes of Norbert, the only test failing is #testUnwindDebuggerWithStep
I wrote an email to squeak-dev and got response from Andreas. I'll try to dig into it und come up with a solution. Great what you did anyway. Now we are on the (how is "Zielgerade" called in english ?? :) ) Norbert
Cheers, Adrian
PS: Stef, it seems that the package versions from the last update you made are still in PharoInbox.
On Jun 20, 2008, at 23:11 , Norbert Hartl wrote:
I applied all changes from the inbox and the test run showed expected results, 2 expected, 4 failures.
Norbert
_______________________________________________ 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
On Sun, 2008-06-22 at 15:07 +0200, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
Ok I was not aware that alain published packages in the inbox. I will go over them. Did norbert published his packages finally?
Yes, the necessary ones weren't problematic. Only the RandomCleanup one which is not essential. Norbert
Stef
On Jun 22, 2008, at 12:42 PM, Adrian Lienhard wrote:
I made 3 more tests pass:
- Fixed Monticello to pass MCSnapshotBrowserTest>>testButtonMutex (Monticello-al.317) - Fix FloatTest to not depend on platform for representation of NaN bit pattern (KernelTests-al.67) - Remove test testUnimplementedNonPrimitiveCalls (Tests-al.25)
So now, using the other fixes of Norbert, the only test failing is #testUnwindDebuggerWithStep
Cheers, Adrian
PS: Stef, it seems that the package versions from the last update you made are still in PharoInbox.
On Jun 20, 2008, at 23:11 , Norbert Hartl wrote:
I applied all changes from the inbox and the test run showed expected results, 2 expected, 4 failures.
Norbert
_______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
On Jun 22, 2008, at 15:45 , Norbert Hartl wrote:
On Sun, 2008-06-22 at 12:42 +0200, Adrian Lienhard wrote:
I made 3 more tests pass:
- Fixed Monticello to pass MCSnapshotBrowserTest>>testButtonMutex (Monticello-al.317) - Fix FloatTest to not depend on platform for representation of NaN bit pattern (KernelTests-al.67) - Remove test testUnimplementedNonPrimitiveCalls (Tests-al.25)
Hmmm I'm not sure if it is a good idea to delete this test. It is a kind of test like ReleaseTest>>testUndeclared. It isn't critical but it helps moving to a clean target. I would opt to keep the test. At least I would turn it into a "expected failure" as long as we aren't far enough to state this to be totally clean.
I'm fine with making this test an expected failure if we want to make it pass in the future (in this case the test should exclude some cases where it is ok that there are no implementors, like for tests that compile those methods at runtime). Adrian
On Sun, 2008-06-22 at 15:51 +0200, Adrian Lienhard wrote:
On Jun 22, 2008, at 15:45 , Norbert Hartl wrote:
On Sun, 2008-06-22 at 12:42 +0200, Adrian Lienhard wrote:
I made 3 more tests pass:
- Fixed Monticello to pass MCSnapshotBrowserTest>>testButtonMutex (Monticello-al.317) - Fix FloatTest to not depend on platform for representation of NaN bit pattern (KernelTests-al.67) - Remove test testUnimplementedNonPrimitiveCalls (Tests-al.25)
Hmmm I'm not sure if it is a good idea to delete this test. It is a kind of test like ReleaseTest>>testUndeclared. It isn't critical but it helps moving to a clean target. I would opt to keep the test. At least I would turn it into a "expected failure" as long as we aren't far enough to state this to be totally clean.
I'm fine with making this test an expected failure if we want to make it pass in the future (in this case the test should exclude some cases where it is ok that there are no implementors, like for tests that compile those methods at runtime).
Hmm, I wasn't sure myself if a test case is the right place to check. Maybe those tests are better suitable in a class where they can be exectued. Norbert
participants (3)
-
Adrian Lienhard -
Norbert Hartl -
Stéphane Ducasse