ROE TestCase (119) started to fail

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

ROE TestCase (119) started to fail

Holger Freyther
Hi all,

while playing around with SUnit I noticed that the ROE test is failing. I have
used git bisect to find the offending commit and verified that by reverting it
everything is passing again.

Git bisected pointed me to this commit:

commit b85deedf443ac8ce3b9021086bf6752b87fedf38
Author: Paolo Bonzini <[hidden email]>
Date:   Tue Apr 6 18:09:08 2010 +0200

    Interval improvements
   
    2010-04-06  Paolo Bonzini <[hidden email]>
   
        * kernel/Interval.st: Fix operations on empty interval, improve
        printing.


I assume the test code is wrong and only due the more strict check of
Interval.st (now giving us an exception) it started to fail? Is anyone else
seeing that?

regards
  holger


PS: tests/testsuite.log is attached.

_______________________________________________
help-smalltalk mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-smalltalk

testsuite.log.zip (49K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ROE TestCase (119) started to fail

Paolo Bonzini-2
On 04/13/2010 03:42 PM, Holger Hans Peter Freyther wrote:
> I assume the test code is wrong and only due the more strict check of
> Interval.st (now giving us an exception) it started to fail? Is anyone else
> seeing that?

Yes, likely.  I'll take a look.

BTW, the glib developers explained the failure to me and it looks like a
solution is possible (and relatively easy, even) for GTK+ on Windows for
GNU Smalltalk 3.2.

Networking is still "there but not really working".  It will be fixed
automagically in 3.3 by using glib more.

Paolo


_______________________________________________
help-smalltalk mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-smalltalk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ROE TestCase (119) started to fail

Paolo Bonzini-2
On 04/13/2010 05:19 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>> I assume the test code is wrong and only due the more strict check of
>> Interval.st (now giving us an exception) it started to fail? Is anyone
>> else
>> seeing that?
>
> Yes, likely.  I'll take a look.

I fixed it in ROE.

Paolo



_______________________________________________
help-smalltalk mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-smalltalk

roe.patch (3K) Download Attachment