|
From: | Archie Cobbs |
Subject: | Re: Progress on a Classpath mauve suite? |
Date: | Tue, 08 Mar 2005 09:11:10 -0600 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20041129 |
Roman Kennke wrote:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/classpath/2004-12/threads.html#00137 we talked about putting together somehow a list of Mauve tests that all Classpath-based VMs should expect to pass, along with another (complementary) list of those tests a Classpath-based VM should expect to fail.Sorry if I am completely naive here, but why should there be tests, that a Classpath-based VM should be expected to fail?? Isn't the whole point to (ideally) pass all tests? If there would be such a test, I would rather rewrite the harness.check(cond) into harness.check(!cond) so that the (expected) failure passes...
Ideally there should be no expected failures. In reality there always are, simply because some feature is unimplemented or some bug has not been tracked down yet. Obviously, any expected failures are good starting points for anyone looking to improve Classpath... another benefit of having (or being able to easily generate) such a list. You wouldn't want to change the test, because the test is written to the spec, not Classpath's (or any VM)'s particualr implementation. I.e., Mauve itself is independent of Classpath or any particular VM. It is supposed to represent what "run anywhere" actually looks like. -Archie __________________________________________________________________________ Archie Cobbs * CTO, Awarix * http://www.awarix.com
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |