On Jan 23, 9:45 pm, Norris Boyd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Jan 23, 10:11 am, Marc Guillemot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Norris, > > > thanks for starting to fix the issues that really matter for HtmlUnit, > > this will allow us to make big steps forwards! > > > I'm quite surprised that you discard the unit tests that I provided and > > add new features without appropriate tests. For me each change should > > have a test to avoid future regression. > > > What is Rhino's strategy concerning (unit) tests? > > > Cheers, > > Marc. > > -- > > Blog:http://mguillem.wordpress.com > > Agreed-- unit testing is good. One of the two problems I committed a > change for (Bug 412247) was changed such that the unit test was no > longer valid. The other fix, for "arguments", could be done using > a .js test like the existing suite and thus benefit SpiderMonkey as > well. Of course I've submitted the changes without the tests yet, so > I'm not working optimally there :-) So I'll do "arguments" at least > and I hope the other soon. > > --N
The "arguments" test has been committed, see https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=392593. --N _______________________________________________ dev-tech-js-engine-rhino mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-js-engine-rhino
