[liblouis-liblouisxml] Re: Why is there an error in this test run?
- From: Keith Creasy <kcreasy@xxxxxxx>
- To: "liblouis-liblouisxml@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <liblouis-liblouisxml@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2014 16:46:35 +0000
Then, what you are calling an "expected failure" is actually a passing test.
So, it should say "passed".
If I write a test that says something like
AssertFalse(1 == 0, "Test that 1 is not equal to 0.");
Then the test passes.
It's not a big deal I guess. Interesting that Mesar interpreted it differently
from you which tells me that the meaning is ambiguous. He thought it meant
failing tests that for bugs that have not been addressed. You are saying that
the test really passed because you got the expected results.
I don't agree. An expected failure is also a "passing test". It's just a
special kind of passing test. We check that the result does NOT match the
"correct" output. liblouis also has expected failures. It's a common thing.
> The goal should always be that all tests pass and no code is committed to the
> main repository until they do.
You are right that ideally for new code tests should be written and that they
should pass before committing. But I added these tests after discovering bugs,
long after the faulty code had been written (written not by me).
> Is anyone in love with the existing tests?
Well it was only meant as a start. There was no testing framework at all before
and I needed one. It is there to be improved. I'm not particularly in love with
the existing tests, but if you mean you want to delete the expected failures, I
say no, they are very useful. They remember us of these bugs each time we build
the program.
For a description of the software, to download it and links to project pages go
to http://www.abilitiessoft.com
For a description of the software, to download it and links to
project pages go to http://www.abilitiessoft.com
Other related posts:
